none
Tracking disbaled - how can BAM be effective ? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi - we have RESTFUL services where all processing is real time. Every minute we keep receiving notifications and message processing takes place.

    Now, our BizTalk infrastructure team disabled all tracking on PROD server. Is it true and Microsoft recommended to disable all tracking on PROD servers  ?

    How can BAM be effective in tracing ? Can it track all Notifications ? Message events ? Messages ?

    I need to track on Ports, Message Box and also in Orch.

    Will BAM have any performance on Prod servers too ? Please advise


    Reason101

    Friday, June 30, 2017 12:35 AM

All replies

  • Please review my answer here as well: BizTalk tracking disabled on Prod server for RESTFUL services

    NO, it has never been a recommendation of Microsoft or the community to disable Global Tracking.  For clarity, it is actually a very bad idea to do so.  I know exactly why that check box is there and it is not for you.

    BAM is for business telemetry.  Tracking is for operational telemetry.  They are focused on two different, but often complementary activities.  But more important, BAM is not a replacement for Tracking.

    You need to enable Global Tracking, then set the Port level Tracking options to what makes sense for your apps.  That is the correct and only solution to your problem.

    Everything affects performance but it is very important to not worry about 'performance' until you can prove that you need to and even more important that what you do will help.  As you are feeling, you are always worse off guessing about performance issues.  If Infrastructure wants to disable Tracking and make everyone's job harder and more expensive, they need to prove, through measurement and analysis, the specific material benefit.

    Friday, June 30, 2017 2:33 AM
    Moderator
  • BAM is not a replacement for BizTalk Tracking. As a matter of fact, you will not be able to record message receipt/transmit times if Global Tracking is disabled.

    Theoretically speaking, any monitoring is an overhead. But at the same time have you measured the performance with/with out tracking enbled and have emperical proof with regards to SLA degradation/performance ?? Till then there is no justification for disabling tracking. Also, IMHO business tracking helps in message audits and other such business compliance related reporting.

    Regards.

    Friday, June 30, 2017 4:58 AM
  • Disabling tracking is not MS recommended. If it was not recommended tracking would not have been there in Biztalk at all. Yes tracking does create an overhead but it is there to help the Biztak folks to understand and TRack what is going on with their app. BAM is a cousin of normal tracking of messages and both have their own functionality.

    Tracking: It is used to track messages, context properties to help nderstand where and how the messages are flowing in the environment.

    BAM: It is used for creating a more high level tracking of the Biztalk flow and to create business centered reports containing details like number of transactions YoY, QoQ basis, States of Transactions etc.

    So yes you should always have option of tracking messages on any environment. As others have said performance should not be issue unless it is backed up by a very strong measurable report 


    Mandar Dharmadhikari

    Friday, June 30, 2017 5:22 AM
    Moderator
  • Hi Reason101

    BAM is not intended for tracking. Infact, behind the covers the BAM and default tracking flows are very much similar, so performance impact, or lack thereof would be similar as well.

    Infact, if you implement BAM incorrectly, eg: use of DirectEventStream, performance will be worse off than Default tracking. So, as suggested in earlier threads, try to use out-of-the-box tracking (minus message body tracking) wherever applicable.


    Thanks Arindam

    Friday, June 30, 2017 6:53 AM
    Moderator