[英]Biztalk message agnostic orchestration
After moving away from Biztalk since BT2006, we're looking at bringing it back into the organization.自从 BT2006 离开 Biztalk 之后,我们正在考虑将其带回组织。 One of the frustrations I had early on was when dealing wht HL7 and orchestrations, we needed to have a seperate orchestration for each ADT message type, even though the schema for each type is essentially the same, and each orchestration did exactly the same thing.我早期遇到的挫折之一是在处理 HL7 和编排时,我们需要为每种 ADT 消息类型进行单独的编排,即使每种类型的模式基本相同,并且每个编排都做完全相同的事情。 Moving forward into the world of BizTalk 2010, has anything improved here?进入 BizTalk 2010 世界,这里有什么改进吗? Is there a pattern I can utilize to use a single orchestration for all ADT types?是否有一种模式可以用来为所有 ADT 类型使用单一编排?
As I see it you have two possibilities here.如我所见,您在这里有两种可能性。
I would prefer the second one;我更喜欢第二个; while it is certainly more work (you need to wrap all your inbound messages in an envelope) it allows you to understand the what the message is by just looking at the envelope header. This means you can still route by message type if you need to.虽然它肯定需要更多工作(您需要将所有入站消息包装在一个信封中),但它允许您通过查看信封 header 来了解消息是什么。这意味着如果需要,您仍然可以按消息类型路由.
HL7 messaging in BizTalk has remained roughly unchanged since the 2006 release. BizTalk 中的 HL7 消息传递自 2006 年发布以来大致保持不变。 Because BizTalk defines a schema for each message and event type (eg ADT^A01, ADT^A03, ADT^A08) and not just for each message type (eg ADT, BAR, MDM), your mapping and orchestrations quickly become a mess.因为 BizTalk 为每个消息和事件类型(例如 ADT^A01、ADT^A03、ADT^A08)定义了一个架构,而不只是为每个消息类型(例如 ADT、BAR、MDM)定义了一个架构,您的映射和编排很快就会变得一团糟。
Here is what I have done in the past to get around this limitation:这是我过去为解决此限制所做的工作:
For mostly pass-through interfaces, I would recommend technique #1.对于大多数直通接口,我会推荐技术#1。 Otherwise, if you will be generating or needing to consume basically any message event in a canonical fashion, technique #2 can pay off in the long run.否则,如果您将以规范的方式生成或需要基本上使用任何消息事件,从长远来看,技术 #2 可以带来回报。
声明:本站的技术帖子网页,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要转载,请注明本站网址或者原文地址。任何问题请咨询:yoyou2525@163.com.