Re: BizTalk 2004 or pure .Net components for request/reply via API:s?
From: Scott Woodgate \(MS\) (replyto_at_newsgroup)
Date: 10/30/04
- Next message: Scott Woodgate \(MS\): "Re: FTP Receive Adapter in BTS Group"
- Previous message: Scott Woodgate \(MS\): "Re: Advice"
- In reply to: Lars Rosenbaum: "BizTalk 2004 or pure .Net components for request/reply via API:s?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:10:09 -0700
BizTalk Server does add a latency but that latency is typically less than a
second. So the question is if BizTalk takes let's say 1 second what is the
latency of the rest of your programming logic (if it is less than 4 seconds
you are fine).
You should tweak the BizTalk system per the performance whitepaper for
low-latency.
"Lars Rosenbaum" <Lars Rosenbaum@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1137117C-A1AA-49F3-A06C-10F666124B65@microsoft.com...
> My question is: With BizTalk Server 2004 instead of BizTalk Server2002,
are
> there new reasons to use BizTalk Server for request/reply messages with
> response times in the range of 0 to 5 seconds?
>
>
> We are currently moving from BizTalk 2004 to BizTalk 2002.
> In our old projects we only used BizTalk 2002 for asynchronous messages.
> For synchronous request / reply messages we used plain .Net
> We didnīt find any good reasons for using BizTalk 2002 for this,
> as we:
> 1) Only have integration with internally controlled systems (some remote)
> 2) Usually not file based messages, instead calling APIs via AIC
> components and/or Web Services
> 3) No mappings between message types
>
> Are there new useful reasons in BizTalk 2004 and/or something we missed
> already in
> BizTalk 2002?
>
>
>
- Next message: Scott Woodgate \(MS\): "Re: FTP Receive Adapter in BTS Group"
- Previous message: Scott Woodgate \(MS\): "Re: Advice"
- In reply to: Lars Rosenbaum: "BizTalk 2004 or pure .Net components for request/reply via API:s?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
