I have a stored procedure which returns a fully formed schema instance as an xml datatype:
<ns0:PolicyCreated xmlns:ns0="http://blah/v1.0">
<ns0:Source>
<ns0:Organisation>Company1</ns0:Organisation>
<ns0:System>System1</ns0:System>
</ns0:Source>
</ns0:PolicyCreated>
The problem is when I try to consume this with the Sql Adapter it wraps the xml in a root node and namespace:
<ns0:PolicyCreated xmlns:ns0="http://blah/v1.0">
<ns0:PolicyCreated xmlns:ns0="http://blah/v1.0">
<ns0:Source>
<ns0:Organisation>Company1</ns0:Organisation>
<ns0:System>System1</ns0:System>
</ns0:Source>
</ns0:PolicyCreated>
</ns0:PolicyCreated>
So I get a double root node and namespace.
Any ideas how can I get around this?
Thanks in adavnce
Tom
Update: It seems there is a way to do this with WCF SQL adapter because you can specify the body xpath on the response message in the send port WCF configutation.
However, this is just wasteful because all you are doing is telling the adapter to "unwrap" the xml and then apply another, identical, wrapper.
With SQL adapter there is no such option. So there is no way to do what I want to do, but it's not the end of the world. I will just have to specify a different wrapper in the sql adapter configuration and have another schema to maintain.
Related
I am trying to use the wcf-sql adapter to call a stored procedure multiple times with different parameters. I have created the original schema using the wizard and then created the composite schema by hand. I understand what the error is telling me I just do not understand why I am getting the error and/or how to resolve it.
Error: Microsoft.ServiceModel.Channels.Common.MetadataException:
Object [dbo].[DEPT_NUM] of type StoredProcedure does not exist. The
message that is suspended in Biztalk looks like this...
<ns0:DINV_sumDepartmentInventory xmlns:ns0="http://schemas.microsoft.com/Sql/2008/05/TypedProcedures/dbo"><ns0:DEPT_NUM> 4</ns0:DEPT_NUM><ns0:INV_DATE>2016-03-21T00:00:00</ns0:INV_DATE><ns0:USERNAME>Service</ns0:USERNAME></ns0:DINV_sumDepartmentInventory>
This is the portion of the orchestration...
This is the map that is associated with the "transform_3" shape...
This is what the composite schema looks like...
I am expecting the output to more like this...
<ns1:Request xmlns:ns1="http://BigY.PICSInventory.Updated_SQL_Schemas.Composite_SumDepartmentInventory" xmlns:ns0="http://schemas.microsoft.com/Sql/2008/05/TypedProcedures/dbo"><ns0:DINV_sumDepartmentInventory><ns0:DEPT_NUM>4</ns0:DEPT_NUM><ns0:INV_DATE>2016-03-21T00:00:00</ns0:INV_DATE><ns0:USERNAME>Service</ns0:USERNAME></ns0:DINV_sumDepartmentInventory></ns1:Request>
Any ideas what is wrong with the setup or what else I can try?
It looks like the Composite Operation is not composed correctly. It has to be a very specific structure with certain namespaces and Operation.
This Wiki Article explains the process step by step: BizTalk Server: Streamlining WCF SQL and Oracle Messaging-Only and Other Patterns
A while back I set up BizTalk to pick up a file via FTP and drop it into a network directory. It's all passsthru so I didn't use an orchestration.
Now I've been asked to execute a stored procedure once the file is picked up. The procedure contains no parameters and I do not need the contents of the file.
It seems like such a simple request but I can't figure it out. Is there any way to do this without over complicating things?
This can be accomplished through the use of either the WCF-SQL adapter or the WCF_Custom adapter with a SQL binding. You can do this using messaging only with just a SendPort with a filter/map on it thus no orchestration needed.
For the SOAP action header use TypedProcedure/dbo/name_of_your_stored_procedure and in the messages tab you can specify the paramters to the stored procuders as well as add a payload in the following manner:
<name_of_your_stored_procedure xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/Sql/2008/05/TypedProcedures/dbo">
<parameter1>XXXX</parameter1>
<xml_parameter>
<bts-msg-body xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/schemas/bts2007" encoding="string"/>
</xml_parameter>
</name_of_your_stored_procedure>
In the above case xml_parameter will have the contents of the message payload passed to it.
The stored procedure should look something like :
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[name_of_your_stored_procedure]
#parameter1 int,
#xml_parameter nvarchar(max)
AS
BEGIN
-- your code goes here
END
More details can be found here
Regards Hasse
This MSDN page describes the process and has this to say: "You must create a BizTalk orchestration to use BizTalk Server for performing an operation on SQL Server."
However if you're really desperate not to use an orchestration I believe you have the option of setting the operation context property in a custom pipeline component. Then you can initialise the message in a map on a port. In theory this should work but I can't guarantee it.
The ESB Toolkit 2.1 has the ALL.Exceptions send port using the old SQL adapter.
But the BizTalk Health Monitor reports ...
Non WCF SQL adapter used in some Send Ports
Prefer to use the WCF one which is more performant !
Is there any way to update to the WCF.SQL adapter?
Yes this is possible. It will however include some custom development.
You will need to create a map between the FaultMessage schema (in Microsoft.Practices.ESB.ExceptionHandling.Schemas.Reporting.dll) and the usp_insert_Fault schema (created using the Consume Adapter Service in Visual Studio, from the usp_insert_Fault SP in the EsbExceptionDb database), as the old SQL Adapter uses a different schema layout to execute a stored procedure.
Required Steps:
Change the Transport Type of the ALL.Exceptions port to WCF-SQL
Set the Address: mssql://SQLServer:1433/SQLInstance/EsbExceptionDb?
Set the Action: TypedProcedure/dbo/usp_insert_Fault
Change the ESBFaultProcessor Send Pipeline to use your custom map in the ESB Transform Component
EDIT: Note: The solution described here does not include the Message and its Context like the map with the SQL Adapter does. To accomplish this, you should make use of Composite Operation to insert into multiple tables in one transaction.
I have a StoredProcedure that returns a simple table containing several records:
DECLARE #STEPS_TABLE AS TABLE (OrchestrationID uniqueidentifier, [Message] nvarchar(1000));
-- LOADING THE VALUES HERE
SELECT * FROM #STEPS_TABLE As Step FOR XML AUTO, XMLDATA, ELEMENTS
I used the SQL Transport Schema Generation Wizard to create my schema and could configure the port correctly. If I use this schema on my orchestration, it works perfectly. BizTalk starts one instance of the orchestration everytime the #STEPS_TABLE has more than 1 record.
Reading Microsoft technical documentation, they recommend to get several messages in one call and then use the XML pipeline to disassemble the multi-row BizTalk message into a single-row BizTalk message.
I haven't used the XML pipeline before, so I tried the provided steps but couldn't get it to work.
Could somebody provide me a link to a "how to" (didn't find anything until now, after several hours of searching) or give me some hints to succeed.
Thanks in advance.
... some hours later I could figure it out myself. So if anybody comes across the same issue as me, here you have some guidelines to make it work on your environment.
At the end I followed a different walkthrough from Microsoft and avoided the pipeline recommendation altogether. The documentation I found is called "Disassembling Result Sets Using the SQL Adapter" and does exactly what i was looking for. You can just follow the whole walkthrough from Microsoft but avoid the creation of the send port and make some little adjustment on the receive port.
After following the technical document you will end up with two schemas, I will call them message and envelope (contains several messages) for the sake of this excercise. In your orchestration you can create a receiving port that maps to the message and then when you configure it as a SQL Port and you link it to your stored procedure (or select statement), you only have to change the Document Root Element Name to the envelope root name; the XML Receive pipeline (provided by default in BizTalk 2006) will do the magic of disassembling the messages contained in the envelope and instantiating an orchestration for each message.
The Microsoft "Disassembling Result Sets Using the SQL Adapter" walkthrough can be found under:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa562098(v=bts.20).aspx
Mission accomplished :)
Apparently, using AttachDbFilename and user instance in your connection string is a bad way to connect to a DB. I'm using SQL server express on my local machine and it all seems to work fine. But what's the proper way to connect to SQL server then?
Thanks for your explanation.
Using User Instance means that SQL Server is creating a special copy of that database file for use by your program. If you have two different programs using that same connection string, they get two entirely different copies of the database. This leads to a lot of confusion, as people will test updating data with their program, then connect to a different copy of their database in Management Studio, and complain that their update isn't working. This sends them through a flawed series of wild goose chase steps trying to troubleshoot the wrong problem.
This article goes into more depth about how to use this feature, but heed the very first note: the User Instance feature has been deprecated. In SQL Server 2012, the preferred alternatives are (in this order, IMHO):
Create or attach your database to a real instance of SQL Server. Your connection string will then just need to specify the instance name, the database name, and credentials. There will be no mixup as Management Studio, Visual Studio and your program(s) will all be connecting to a single copy of the database.
Use a container for local development. Here's a great starter video by Anna Hoffman and Anthony Nocentino, and I have some other resources here, here, and here. If you're on an M1 Mac, you won't be able to use a full-blown SQL Server instance, but you can use Azure SQL Edge if you can get by with most SQL Server functionality (the omissions are enumerated here).
Use SqlLocalDb for local development. I believe I pointed you to this article yesterday: "Getting Started with SQL Server 2012 Express LocalDB."
Use SQL Server Compact. I like this option the least because the functionality and syntax is not the same - so it's not necessarily going to provide you with all the functionality you're ultimately going to want to deploy. Compact Edition is also deprecated, so there's that.
Of course if you are using a version < SQL Server 2012, SqlLocalDb is not an option - so you should be creating a real database and using that consistently. I only mention the Compact option for completeness - I think that can be almost as bad an idea as using AttachDbFileName.
EDIT: I've blogged about this here:
Bad Habits : Using AttachDBFileName
In case someone had the problem.
When attaching the database with a connection string containing AttachDBFile
with SQLEXPRESS, I noticed this connection was exclusive to the ASP.NET application that was using the database. The connection did block the access to all other processes on the file level when made with System.Data.SqlClient as provider.
In order to assure the connection to be shareable with other processes
instead use DataBase to specify the database name in your connection string
Example or connection string :
Data Source=.\SQLEXPRESS;DataBase=PlaCliGen;User ID=XXX;password=ZZZ; Connect Timeout=30
,where PlaCliGen is the name (or logical name) by which SQLEXPRESS server knows the database.
By connecting to the data base with AttachDBFile giving the path to the .mdf file
(namely : replacing DataBase = PlacliGen by AttachDBFile = c:\vs\placligen\app_data\placligen.mdf) the File was connected exclusively and no other process could connect to the database.