locked
What I miss in BizTalk ...

    General discussion

  • After reading this thread I decided to start this discussion.
    Please, write a feature if you deadly want it to be in the BizTalk Server.
    Please, try your best to be as clear as possible.
    Please, put only one feature in one post. 

    Template is:

    • What I miss in BizTalk: <...>
    • What can be done to fix it: <...>
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? <1(easy)..10(hard)> <Comments...>

    Readers of this topic, please, Vote As Helpful for the posts you also needed.


    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions







    Thursday, November 29, 2012 10:30 PM
    Moderator

All replies

    • What I miss in BizTalk: the "String" (or "Constant String") functoid in the Mapper. It is not intuitive to use the Concatenate functoid to map a predefined string value. The Concatenate creates a strange xslt code, something like this
     <xsl:variable name="var:v32" select="userCSharp:StringConcat(" ")" /> 
    
     <APUser20_NotUsed>
       <xsl:value-of select="$var:v32" /> 
    It looks like a bug, we don't have such functoid. We have Integer, we have Nil Value, but don't have a String (BTW we also don't have True and False functoids).
       
    • What can be done to fix it: add a new functoid to the Mapper Toolbox: String Functoids: "String".
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 1   Super easy

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions




    Thursday, November 29, 2012 10:41 PM
    Moderator
    • What I miss in BizTalk: The BizTalk schema editor should support the editing of global complex types, attribute groups, etc., without the need for a global element in the same schema which contains them. This is common in what many people refer to as Type schemas - schemas that only define a set of reuseable simple and complex types and which are then included in other schemas. The BizTalk editor only creates a tree structure on the left for each global element in the schema and therefore it can only be used to edit the content that is accessible through those global elements. The following schema is an example of a perfectly valid schema that cannot be edited using the BizTalk schema editor:

    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-16"?> <xs:schema xmlns="http://MyNs" targetNamespace="http://MyNs" elementFormDefault="qualified" xmlns:b="http://schemas.microsoft.com/BizTalk/2003" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> <xs:complexType name="Address"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="Street" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element name="City" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element name="ZipCode" type="xs:string" /> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> </xs:schema>

    • What can be done to fix it: Change the GUI of the schema editor to display the tree structure of complex types under the Schema folder so that they can be edited.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 3   Not too difficult, but not trivial.



    Friday, November 30, 2012 1:18 AM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: A socket adapter capable of framed/unframed message handling. Of all the base transports, I do not understand why this transport (simple TCP/IP socket) has been left out. They're even introducing sftp despite the FTP/s adapter so why not socket?

    What can be done to fix it: There already exists a BTSTCPIP adapter on Codeplex that supports framed messages and has been used with some degree of success in certain implementations but is lacking support for unframed messages. This can be taken up, regularized by Microsoft.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 3-4.

    Most of the work has been done, what needs to be added is the code rigour, support and performance characterization results.

    Regards.

    Friday, November 30, 2012 4:39 AM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Allowing variables to be used in BizTalk mapper (at the source side) along with the schemas for assigning its value to some field in the destination schema

    What can be done to fix it: Allow the selection of variable while configuring the Transform shape in the similar way as the selection of multiple schemas in done currently.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: Not sure but I think 4-5.

    This kind of situation is often encountered where the value of a variable needs to be assigned to one of the field of the destination schema. This is currently done using the XPATH or by promoting the fields to assign the values after constructing the destination message, which actually becomes an additional step.

    Regards,

    Sumit


    • Edited by Verma.Sumit Friday, November 30, 2012 6:33 AM
    Friday, November 30, 2012 6:32 AM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Sticking to one way of naming something, like "Global Tracking" in the BizTalk Administration Console it's called "Group-level Tracking" All over the web and from the community it's called "Global Tracking".

    What can be done to fix it: Change it... :)

    Do I think it is an easy fix? 1 - Very easy!

    Friday, November 30, 2012 8:28 AM
    Owner
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Naming under "host setting". Resource-Based Throttling, Rate-Based Throttling and Orchestration Throttling should be renamed. 

    What can be done to fix it:

    Resource-Based Throttling: This should be changed into Resource-Based Thresholds (or something similar) since this is where you set the different thresholds for BizTalk. The throttling in the name makes this very confusing for a lot of people.

    Rate-Based Throttling: This is also confusing and should be renamed into something like "Throttling based on Rates" the options you have here will only affect when throttling is initiated and contains no thresholds based on rates of messages etc...

    Orchestration Throttling: This has NOTHING to do with throttling and should be renamed into something like "Orchestration Dehydration Behavior" or "Orchestration Behavior"

    Do I think it is an easy fix? 1 - I would say this would be very easy to resolve since it's only a name change.

    Friday, November 30, 2012 8:34 AM
    Owner
  • What I miss in BizTalk: More controlled layout of the settings under host and "Resource-Based Throttling".

    What can be done to fix it: First of all the comments are very confusing for a lot, the same goes for the naming. For instance the "Message count in the DB" is amounts of messages in the DB for a specific host, however the spool and tracking multiplier is the value of the "message count in the DB" times the value set in the multiplier. This should be closer and the layout should show that this is a part of the "message count in the DB" the same goes for the other elements that goes hand-in-hand.

    Do I think it is an easy fix? 1 - Very easy!

    Friday, November 30, 2012 8:37 AM
    Owner
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Access to context properties in the mapper

    What can be done to fix it: Create a functoid in which context properties can be retrieved from the source message.

    Do I think it is an easy fix? Probably (1-3)

    Friday, November 30, 2012 1:39 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: A generic role link type that can comply with both one-way send port and sollicit-response send port
    • What can be done to fix it: The orchestration designer should provide late binding with role links and receive shape should be able to be skipped if a one-way send port is used
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 6. A little hard because of dynamic subscription
    Friday, November 30, 2012 2:47 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Excel parser. Even if it is a binary format, it should be possible for Microsoft to handle it.
    • What can be done to fix it: Create an Excel assembler and dissasembler.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 3
    Friday, November 30, 2012 2:57 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Being able to have the famous F5 debug experience in Visual Studio
    • What can be done to fix it: Add a BizTalk engine to Visual Studio, just like with the webserver Cassini is done. It will probably easier when the XLang engine is replaced by WF
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 10 - probably, otherwise we would have had it already

    Jean-Paul Smit | Didago IT Consultancy
    Blog | Twitter | LinkedIn
    MCTS BizTalk 2006/2010 + Certified SOA Architect

    Please indicate "Mark as Answer" if this post has answered the question.

    Friday, November 30, 2012 3:43 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: 
      BTS Admin Console: additional"Columns" command to choose additional columns in views. Without those additional columns we have to sometimes double-click on each records in the view (now I'm working with x00 deployed artifacts) or trying to create a custom query to the Management database. It might look like this one in the Microsoft Outlook:

      What columns might be useful :
         for a Send Ports view: Columns (Filter, Send Pipe, Receive Pipe, Map(s), Retry Count, Retry Interval, Bound To..., Ordered Delivery, Service Window, Tracking...)
    •  What can be done to fix it: improvements in the Admin Console UI
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 2-3 It does not requires some redesign, it is just additional UI elements. BTW. There is also the View command which is doing nothing now.

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions



    Friday, November 30, 2012 5:40 PM
    Moderator
    • What I miss in BizTalk: unclogged Expression Editor window (see the picture). If I dock it, the tips cover the precious space, all those tips which I need the first time but not for the routine work. It is a poor usability.
    • What can be done to fix it: for example, remove all tips and add them to the "?" button on toolbar.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 



    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions




    Friday, November 30, 2012 9:16 PM
    Moderator
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Biztalk Expression Editor with the same functionnalities as the C# code editor.
    • What can be done to fix it: Use the same layout template as the C# editor;
    • Do I think it is an easy fix?  2 - It s reusing an already existing component, so I guess it should not be that hard.

    Hautecoeur F. MCTS Biztalk 2010 MCTS WCF 3.5, 4.0

    Monday, December 03, 2012 2:30 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Configure Scripting Functoid in Mapping Editor with the same functionnalities as the C# code editor (or XML).
    • What can be done to fix it: Use the same layout template as the C# editor;
    • Do I think it is an easy fix?  2 - It s reusing an already existing component, so I guess it should not be that hard.

    Hautecoeur F. MCTS Biztalk 2010 MCTS WCF 3.5, 4.0

    Monday, December 03, 2012 2:35 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Integration of PAL/MessageBox Viewer tool with BizTalk Admin console or provide few basic checklist/report of BizTalk farm. e.g 

    1- if SQL Jobs are enabled and running

    2- State of Spool tables.

    3- If a Host is used heavily ( max no of applications/adapters are using that)

    4- Report based on Host Instances

    • What can be done to fix it: Integration witj PAL/MessageBox Viewer scripts to BizTalk admin console
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 3-4

    HTH,
    Naushad Alam

    When you see answers and helpful posts, please click Vote As Helpful, Propose As Answer, and/or Mark As Answer
    alamnaushad.wordpress.com

    Monday, December 03, 2012 3:26 PM
    Moderator
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Access to Configuration properties (key-value items stored in BizTalk Config File/SSO Store) in BizTalk mapper

    What can be done to fix it: Create a generic functoid in which these configuration item values can be retrieved from the sources by passing the source type/name/item. e.g. Source- SSO, Name- SSO application Name,Item-Source Post code
    Do I think it is an easy fix? Probably (1-3)

    HTH,
    Naushad Alam

    When you see answers and helpful posts, please click Vote As Helpful, Propose As Answer, and/or Mark As Answer
    alamnaushad.wordpress.com

    Monday, December 03, 2012 3:31 PM
    Moderator
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Not having to use the transform shape to create a map with multiple input schemas
    • What can be done to fix it: Extend mapper functionality using Visual Studio extensions
    • Do I think it is an easy fix?  5

    Jean-Paul Smit | Didago IT Consultancy
    Blog | Twitter | LinkedIn
    MCTS BizTalk 2006/2010 + Certified SOA Architect

    Please indicate "Mark as Answer" if this post has answered the question.

    Monday, December 03, 2012 3:31 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Functoid to read from SSO or BRE
    • What can be done to fix it: Create more functoids to support these scenario's
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 1

    Jean-Paul Smit | Didago IT Consultancy
    Blog | Twitter | LinkedIn
    MCTS BizTalk 2006/2010 + Certified SOA Architect

    Please indicate "Mark as Answer" if this post has answered the question.

    Monday, December 03, 2012 3:32 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Create a Configuration storage with an API, accessible from everywhere in the BizTalk farm in a consistent manner. Now we use the SSO, config files, the custom storages
      Consider to use this API for the Port settings. For example,
      port URL: http:"%ConfigBase(\"GLD.Samples.MyPortURL\",\"Prod\")%/MyService/Service.svc".
      The "
      GLD.Samples.MyPortURL"  parameter with qualificators "Dev,QA,Stage,Prod" is defined in the Config database.
      Or better: 
      port URL: http:"%ConfigBase(\"GLD.Samples.MyPortURL\",ConfigBase(\"GLD.Samples.CurrentEnvironment\"))%/MyService/Service.svc".
    • What can be done to fix it: It could be an additional interface to the  SSO or to a specialized storage. Maybe using a NonSQL database would be the simplest way. 
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 3. It does not require to change the existed code, so it is not so hard.

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions



    Monday, December 03, 2012 4:56 PM
    Moderator
    • What I miss in BizTalk: The additional operations on the Ports in the BizTalk Admin Console: Cut-Copy-Past, Export. We are working with Ports only in the Admin Console, not in VS. We could do such things for Orchestrations, Schemas, Maps in VS and this is helpful. But we could not easily create a copy of a port nor export (to change some parameters with script then import it back).
    • What can be done to fix it: Implement a service pack?
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 3. It does not require to change the existed code, so it is not so hard.

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions

    Monday, December 03, 2012 5:06 PM
    Moderator

    • What I miss in BizTalk: Better and Rich UI for BAM Portal. 
    • What can be done to fix it:   Write a completely new UI using latest web technologies/interfaces to show the BAM related data/milestones.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 3-4, Not very complex. 

    HTH,
    Naushad Alam

    When you see answers and helpful posts, please click Vote As Helpful, Propose As Answer, and/or Mark As Answer
    alamnaushad.wordpress.com

    Monday, December 03, 2012 9:19 PM
    Moderator
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Integration of  BizTalk Terminator to BizTalk Admin Console 
    • What can be done to fix it:   A new feature /function to be added to call the Terminator routine from BizTalk Admin Console after selecting bulk of messages. 
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 2-4, Not very complex. 

    HTH,
    Naushad Alam

    When you see answers and helpful posts, please click Vote As Helpful, Propose As Answer, and/or Mark As Answer
    alamnaushad.wordpress.com

    Monday, December 03, 2012 9:25 PM
    Moderator
    • What I miss in BizTalk: an Error Handling Subsystem. Good amount of orchestrations is created only to do some elementary EH. The ESB EH is so-so, better than nothing but still not good enough.
      The error producing could be similar to the ESB EH, with creating a special message error type with different options to include the error message (with context), the messages preceddeng the error message with additional EH options on the ports, orchestrations, other artifacts.
      The error handling could be just the utilities or the specialized databases, an EH Portal with an API and a possibility of a manual intervention, etc, etc. 
      The existed BizTalk EH is not good enough for the developers, users, operators.
    • What can be done to fix it:   Design and develop a new EH subsystem. 
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 8  It is not easy but it is not the core system however it requires to change the core.

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions


    Wednesday, December 05, 2012 3:25 AM
    Moderator
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Ability in BAM to export the data into EXCEL or as CSV

    What can be done to fix it: Client side jugglery that takes the current data available as an XML Data island in the current BAM rendering and permit that to be exported into excel client.

    DO I think it is an easy fix: 5-6. assumption that the client for BAM will have the excel object or a plug-in available that will permit the conversion of the XML data island into an Excel consumable output.

    Regards.

    Wednesday, December 05, 2012 6:11 AM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Different way of caching application in the Administration console

    What can be done to fix it: I would say that when you open up your group, first cache the name of the applications, then when you open a specific application only cache whatever is inside of this application. This will make it easier for those companies that actually have more than 80 applications in their environment.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 4 - easy enough, but a lot of the elements that's been used for the last 4 (5) versions has to be changed.

    Wednesday, December 05, 2012 7:20 AM
    Owner
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Modular or Reusable Mapping. When we have a large schema and several maps for different scenarios, but part of all these maps are common, we have do replicate it in all the maps.

    What can be done to fix it: Introduce an orchestration shape / ESB Transform Service that takes multiple maps as input, cascade the ouput from one map to another and finally return one output.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 5.


    Thanks, Murugesan M - Please Mark as the Answer, if this answers your question. Please vote as helpful, if this post is helpful.

    Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:13 PM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Failed Message Routing should provide actual error (ie. inner exception) instead of generic error.

    What can be done to fix it: When an exception is caught and failed message is generated include the actual exception raised by offending component.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 1. Super easy.


    Thanks, Murugesan M - Please Mark as the Answer, if this answers your question. Please vote as helpful, if this post is helpful.

    Thursday, December 06, 2012 10:23 AM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Standard and simplified installation/setup procedure for ESB toolkit and ESB Portal.

    What can be done to fix it: Seeing the installation of ESB toolkit being made a part of BizTalk Installation in BizTalk Server 2013 Beta, the ESB Portal installation automation using a setup shouldn't be a problem.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 3-4


    Regards,
    Bali
    MCTS: BizTalk Server 2010,BizTalk Server 2006 and WCF
    My Blog:dpsbali-biztalkweblog
    -----------------------------------------------------
    Mark As Answer or Vote As Helpful if this helps.

    Thursday, December 06, 2012 7:24 PM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Access to an Orchestration Filter from the Admin Console (a Filter on the Activate Receive shape).
    It effectively makes the Orchestration Filters the run-time parameters not the design-time parameters. Now to change filer we have to use the Orchestration Editor and redeploy the application. Cons is it makes more space for the errors but, IMO, the Pros are bigger than Cons. BTW It could be done as an option. 

    What can be done to fix it: Move the Orchestration Filter parameters from assembly into the binding.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 3-4


    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions

    Thursday, December 06, 2012 7:52 PM
    Moderator
  • What I miss in BizTalk: If messages fail a solution to mark multiple messages and choose "Export" and export them to a file share of my wish.. :)

    What can be done to fix it: Add the functionality.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 2 not too hard

    Friday, December 07, 2012 8:55 AM
    Owner
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Better auditing, like if a message is terminated instead of writing "Terminated by user" I want to see more like "Terminated by <domain\username> I can't believe this hasn't been resolved already

    What can be done to fix it: Add the functionality.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 2 not too hard



    Friday, December 07, 2012 8:56 AM
    Owner
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Access to promoted/distinguished properties in other custom pipeline components in the receive pipeline. I have had scenarios when I had to access the promoted/distinguished properties which are promoted by the Xml Disassembler/Flat file Disassembler component in custom pipeline components which follow the disassembler component. With the current BizTalk design, these properties are only available to orchestration or send ports.
    • What can be done to fix it: When I went through the disassembler's code using Reflector, Mircrosoft have used the below unsupported classes to deeply add the properties into the stream. PropPathPromoteAnnotation Class PropPathWriteDistinguishedAnnotation Class The code can be changed to move the properties to the IBaseMessage context class.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? Honestly, not sure.
    Friday, December 07, 2012 11:09 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: If you are writing and If clause in expression shape of orchestration, then inside the If block you will not able to see any inteliense for any object .
    • What can be done to fix it: Try to write the code block outside the if block , then move it inside if block
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? Yes it an easy fix..
    Saturday, December 08, 2012 2:13 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Not able to Add Multiple source  schema in Map.
    • What can be done to fix it: Try to generate the map from Orchestration using the Transform Shape , then it allow the same , if u don't need the orchestration you can delete the same.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? :- Easy , but i didn't understand , When it  allow the other way round why does not it allow in normal way .

    Saturday, December 08, 2012 2:19 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: A method to move receive locations from one receive port to another
    • What can be done to fix it: Utilize export/import binding tools
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? Use existing binding code and extra functionality

    rgds /Peter

    Tuesday, December 11, 2012 9:04 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: A way for distinguished field coming from DateTime XML elements to be assigned to System.DateTimeOffset instead of System.DateTime. While the XML datetime structure is time zone aware, System.DateTime is not, so the time zone information is always lost. I actually wrote a post about this here
    • What can be done to fix it: The main issue will be to be backward compatible. So the code generated by the orchestration would have to be smart enough to make sure it works for both data type.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 4
    Tuesday, December 11, 2012 11:48 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: 
    • Better implementation of WCF (Standart Fault contract support)
    • More adapters (Sybase, Entity Framework aware, etc)
    • Have SSO functionality in the standard libraries of BizTalk 
    • Compile schema's to classes (like with the XSD /c) as well so they can be used everywhere
    • Low Latency Support, (possibillity to process messages in memory)
    • Better BAM Portal 
    • Better interface to view messages in the Management Console (XML view)
    • What can be done to fix it: 
    • Microsoft has to build these components
    • Do I think it is an easy fix?
    • They are all fairly easy to implement except for the low latency support. 

    Well0549, Please remember to click “Mark as Answer” on the post that helps you, and to click “Unmark as Answer” if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread

    Wednesday, December 12, 2012 7:57 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: When importing Schemas using the "Consume Adapter Service" or "Consume WCF Service" from SAP the serialization.xsd and IDocSharedTypes.xsd are repeated each time an import is done. Each time, I have to check those files are identical and change the import references in the imported schemas. I miss those steps to be automated.
    • What can be done to fix it: Each time we import schemas, check if the xsd imported are already there, if they are check if they are the same or not instead of incrementing the number of the name.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 3

    Hautecoeur F. MCTS Biztalk 2010 MCTS WCF 3.5, 4.0

    Wednesday, December 12, 2012 8:46 AM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: The ability to have more control over the date time macros for the file/ftp adapters.

    What can be done to fix it: Provide a macro that lets me specify the date time format in a macro using .NET formatting. Something like  %dt_YYYYmmdd%.

    Do I think it is an easy fix? 1 - I've had to code this myself for almost every client because they can't use the included date time formats.


    Free Guest Pass – Experience .NET training the way it should be.

    Wednesday, December 12, 2012 5:04 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Support of BAM portal to other Browser.
    • What can be done to fix it:   The Web Portal should be independent of browser .. as of now it just support IE browser..
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? Not able to find the Solution yet ..
    Thursday, December 13, 2012 10:16 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: I want to configure the pipeline at the run-time and get rid of the Pipeline Editor at last.
      For example, to convert several Flat File types into Xml I have to create and deploy several pipelines. It would be much easy and flexible and intuitive to configure a pipeline as a step into a port configuration process. Want to change a FF schema? Just modify the port, no more VS and redeployment steps. The pipeline editor so powerless, it would be easy to move its functionality to the BizTalk Admin Console.
    • What can be done to fix it: Add this functionality to the BizTalk Admin Console. The old Pipeline Editor could be still there, no need to change it. There might be some redesign in the BizTalk artifact model, maybe not.
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 5 I think it would be easy, because all internal pieces are here.

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalkien: Advanced Questions

    Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:22 PM
    Moderator
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Out of the Box, Web Monitoring Tool ( ESB + BizTalk Group Hub), Ports + host instance.monitoring, email notifications
    • What can be done to fix it: Add as a feature
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 10

    Randy Aldrich Paulo

    MCTS(BizTalk 2010/2006,WCF NET4.0), MCPD | My Blog


    BizTalk Message Archiving - SQL and File
    Automating/Silent Installation of BizTalk Deployment Framework using Powershell >
    Sending IDOCs using SSIS

    Monday, December 17, 2012 8:59 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Integrated, fast logger/tracing component/library (similar to what BizTalk CAT developed), that can be called from orchestration, a property in pipeline/maps and etc. The logs can be shown in message flow and in the online monitoring tool. Ability to turn-off/on the tracing by application/maps/pipeline and etc.
    • What can be done to fix it: Add as a feature
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 10

    Randy Aldrich Paulo

    MCTS(BizTalk 2010/2006,WCF NET4.0), MCPD | My Blog


    BizTalk Message Archiving - SQL and File
    Automating/Silent Installation of BizTalk Deployment Framework using Powershell >
    Sending IDOCs using SSIS

    Monday, December 17, 2012 9:04 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Update the ESB Tool Kit to use Enterprise Library 5.0 instead of 4.1
    • What can be done to fix it: Update the references/codes ? 
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 4

    Randy Aldrich Paulo

    MCTS(BizTalk 2010/2006,WCF NET4.0), MCPD | My Blog


    BizTalk Message Archiving - SQL and File
    Automating/Silent Installation of BizTalk Deployment Framework using Powershell >
    Sending IDOCs using SSIS

    Monday, December 17, 2012 9:06 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Out of the box improved online KPI report generations (aside from BAM), Ability (on the fly) to generate a report based on message type/application/maps/pipeline etc on avg processing time/no of errors etc.  per any given hours/day/month/year
    • What can be done to fix it: Improve BAM or add new features
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 10

    Randy Aldrich Paulo

    MCTS(BizTalk 2010/2006,WCF NET4.0), MCPD | My Blog


    BizTalk Message Archiving - SQL and File
    Automating/Silent Installation of BizTalk Deployment Framework using Powershell >
    Sending IDOCs using SSIS

    Monday, December 17, 2012 9:13 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: An easier way to debugg Orchestration and Mapps.
    • What can be done to fix it: add alot of Expression shape that write to event logg,(temp solution)
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? Unknown..
    Tuesday, December 18, 2012 8:41 PM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Support for XSLT 2.0.  Having to shoehorn a .Net function call into a map to get the current date or time, for example, is cumbersome.  You take a performance hit too (unless you use XslCompiledTransform).  Being forced to use XSLT because the BizTalk mapper does not fulfill a requirement and then being denied an XSLT 2.0 feature...

    What can be done to fix it: Adoption of the XSLT 2.0 specification by Microsoft.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: Unfortunately not. 9-10.



    • Edited by Greg.Sharp Wednesday, December 19, 2012 11:01 AM
    Wednesday, December 19, 2012 10:28 AM
  • What I miss in BizTalk: Ability to edit the message in the MessageDetails window in Administration console for Suspended messages that are resumable. This may make ESB exception handling obsolete.

    What can be done to fix it: Make the window editable instead of read only, when the message gets edited, store the new message in MessageBox

    Do i think its an easy fix: May be, 1-3.


    -Satya

    Wednesday, December 19, 2012 8:16 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk:

    Option to allow a Send/Receive operation to not raise a NACK/SOAP Exception when a transmission error occurs so that the orchestration just gets de-hydrated on the correlated receive. When the send message is manually resumed in the BizTalk console and the response is received, it is delivered to the orchestration which continues processing from its receive shape.

    Currently we need to write a loop / scope / exception / retry if not sent for every send/receive - why all this code when we just want BizTalk to do its job?

    • What can be done to fix it:

    Add an option on the Send/Receive port type to enable/disable generation of NACK/SOAPException on transmission error.

    • Do I think it is an easy fix

    Sounds a very easy fix to me.

    Thursday, December 20, 2012 4:07 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: more powerful and useful promoted properties (PP) in schemas: using non-existed (null) nodes as PP, using nodes with maxOccurs > 1 as PP.
    • What can be done to fix it: modify the XmlReceive and XMLTransmit pipes. 
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 2 Not sure it could be something more than extending XmlReceive and XMLTransmit pipes.

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalk: Internals: the Partner Direct Ports and the Orchestration Chains

    Thursday, December 20, 2012 7:57 PM
    Moderator
  • What I miss in BizTalk: The ability in BAM to define a view filter for a specific field. So for e.g.: I'm storing sensitive information in my BAM such as account number/card number, etc, while using TDE I can provide data security, during my BAM reporting I should be able to only view the masked information (for PCI DSS compliance, etc)

    What can be done to fix it: During the data definiton (excel) stage they should be able to add a option for displaying the data in a masked format and if selected ask for the mask. This along with the definiton can then be imported into the database and stored. Through the BAM UI, the mask should then be applied before rendering the results.

    Do I think it is an easy fix? 2-3 as it only affectes the data rendering and in no way impacts the underlying event collection or BAM architecture.

    Regards.

    Monday, December 24, 2012 9:37 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: use the promoted properties (PP) into the BizTalk macros on ports. It will make the port configuration more flexible and useful.  As an example, I need to set up a Send port to send files with names as ...\<CustomerName>\<DeptName>_<datetime>.xml 
      Now I have to create an orchestration or a pipeline component and pipeline to do so. But just using macros like %PP% will save a fortune of the development time.
    • What can be done to fix it: modify the port framework? 
    • Do I think it is an easy fix?   4-6 It is not easy

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalk: Internals: the Partner Direct Ports and the Orchestration Chains


    Tuesday, January 08, 2013 6:00 PM
    Moderator
  • What I miss in BizTalk:  More tooling for the DTA.
    As Tom Canter mentioned in the i
    nterview to Richard "...One notable thing I’ve learned in this regard is requirements, like archiving every message. Somewhere in the past everyone got the idea that the DTA Tracking should be avoided. Over the years the product team has worked out the bugs, and the DTA Tracking is a solid, reliable tool. Unfortunately that belief is still out there, and customers avoid the DTA Engine..."
    I would add, the DTA data is not easy to use. It is easy enough to gather, but how to use it? I saw the custom made portal to get the view to the interchanges. Where all messages in the interchange where gathered together with easy access to body and context. And it was enormously popular.
    It could work like "simple BAM" but a way easy to set up and use.
    The UI to manage the DTA data to prune and archive and extract and create views...

    What can be done to fix it: Add the functionality.

    Do I think it is an easy fix: 2 - it could be just an addition without changing the existed code.


    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalk: Internals: the Partner Direct Ports and the Orchestration Chains


    Tuesday, January 08, 2013 6:58 PM
    Moderator

    • What I miss in BizTalk:

    The ability to define the filter to activate an orchestration through bindings

    • What can be done to fix it: 

    Would be a nice future feature

    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 

    I am not sure.  I would assume it might be complicated

    Tuesday, January 08, 2013 11:48 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk:

    Ability to make some sends be done synchronously eg in wcf adapters rather than async which can result in timeouts in high load scenarios

    this is one of the most common patterns i implement when the backend systems perform poorly

    • What can be done to fix it: 

    Modified adapters to include new throttling settings

    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 

    Probably medium 

    Tuesday, January 08, 2013 11:51 PM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: A date format converter functiod. This functiod should accept a date and a date format. The output of this functiod should be converted date with new format.
    • What can be done to fix it: Create New functiod
    • Do I think it is an easy fix?  1

    https://www.mcpvirtualbusinesscard.com/VBCServer/card.aspx?tag=YagyaDattMishra&wa=wsignin1.0

    Wednesday, January 09, 2013 7:54 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: An If Else functiod. This functiod should work like If Else block in C#.
    • What can be done to fix it: Create New functiod
    • Do I think it is an easy fix?  6


    https://www.mcpvirtualbusinesscard.com/VBCServer/card.aspx?tag=YagyaDattMishra&wa=wsignin1.0

    Wednesday, January 09, 2013 9:56 AM
    • What I miss in BizTalk: Actually, I don't miss it but I would like to remove the NTGroupName attribute from binding file  :)
              <Host Name="ProcessHost" NTGroupName="BizTalk Application Users" Type="1" Trusted="false" />
    when we export a binding we've got such nodes for orchestrations. The NTGroupName should not be here! It is unnecessary because NTGroupName is a parameter of the Host. Defining Host like "ProcessHost" we automatically choose the correspondent Group for it. (For example, the port definitions are correct: only Host name is placed, the NTGroupName is not placed there). It seems not a big deal, but for automated deployment (for example with BTDF), we must take care of this NTGroupName. It is error-prone and absolutely wrong. In BizTalk Admin Console we can choose the host but not hosts parameters!
    • What can be done to fix it: remove NTGroupName attribute from the binding
    • Do I think it is an easy fix? 2 it looks easy but can broke backward compatibility. 

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalk: Internals: Namespaces


    Wednesday, January 09, 2013 7:10 PM
    Moderator
  • This Datetime functionality is already included in 2013 version
    Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:50 AM
  • To be continued here.

    Leonid Ganeline [BizTalk MVP] BizTalk: Internals: Namespaces

    Tuesday, January 29, 2013 4:13 PM
    Moderator