http://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/atom.xmlCommunity Server2009-08-01T20:29:00Zhttp://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/12/18/performance-tip-when-using-wcf-custom-with-dynamic-send-ports-and-custom-bindings-on-biztalk-server-2009.aspx2009-12-18T05:49:00Z2009-12-18T05:49:00ZIn BizTalk Server 2006 R2, when the WCF-Custom adapter was used with any binding, the WCF-Adapter would try to determine, at runtime, whether a System.Transactions TransactionScope was required when sending a message over a channel. This involved the following: If an out-of-box binding was used, then most of those bindings have a Transactions property. We would look at that to determine whether the property value was true or false. If a custom binding was used (either WCF's CustomBinding, or your...(<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/12/18/performance-tip-when-using-wcf-custom-with-dynamic-send-ports-and-custom-bindings-on-biztalk-server-2009.aspx">read more</a>)<img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9938562" width="1" height="1">mdoctorhttp://blogs.msdn.com/members/mdoctor.aspxhttp://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/10/09/Using-the-WCF-Federation-Bindings-with-the-WCF-Adapter-in-Microsoft-Biztalk-Server-2006-R2-SP1.aspx2009-10-09T09:00:00Z2009-10-09T09:00:00ZEven though the WCF Federation bindings aren’t yet officially supported for use with the WCF Adapter, for most purposes, you can get your scenario to work (and in case your scenario does not work as expected, you should contact Microsoft Support so that we can investigate the issue - we of course might not fix it since we dont support this binding, but then again - we might fix the bug if we have available resources). In this post, I’m going to port over a MSDN sample which uses the Ws2007FederationHttpBinding...(<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/10/09/Using-the-WCF-Federation-Bindings-with-the-WCF-Adapter-in-Microsoft-Biztalk-Server-2006-R2-SP1.aspx">read more</a>)<img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9829976" width="1" height="1">mdoctorhttp://blogs.msdn.com/members/mdoctor.aspxhttp://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/09/10/planning-for-the-next-release-of-biztalk-what-new-wcf-adapter-features-do-you-want.aspx2009-09-10T20:46:37Z2009-09-10T20:46:37ZWe will kick off planning for the next release of BizTalk in a few weeks. I’m interested to hear what features / changes in the WCF Adapter you think would be beneficial to your scenarios. Please add your comments to this post describing your scenarios and your requests. Thanks....(<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/09/10/planning-for-the-next-release-of-biztalk-what-new-wcf-adapter-features-do-you-want.aspx">read more</a>)<img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9893778" width="1" height="1">mdoctorhttp://blogs.msdn.com/members/mdoctor.aspxhttp://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/09/08/using-one-way-operations-with-the-wcf-adapter-in-biztalk.aspx2009-09-08T21:24:00Z2009-09-08T21:24:00ZIf you’ve used the WCF Adapter in BizTalk to communicate using one-way contracts with WCF Clients (by having a WCF Receive Location) or WCF Services (by having a WCF Send Port), you must have realized that the WCF Adapter cannot handle one-way contracts easily. The current design of the adapter is this: For send ports, if the binding used supports any one of IRequestChannel, IRequestSessionChannel or IDuplexChannel, then we attempt to use the IRequestChannel contract. As a result all operations now...(<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/09/08/using-one-way-operations-with-the-wcf-adapter-in-biztalk.aspx">read more</a>)<img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9892726" width="1" height="1">mdoctorhttp://blogs.msdn.com/members/mdoctor.aspxhttp://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/08/28/huge-memory-consumption-when-executing-maps-present-in-large-assemblies.aspx2009-08-28T13:44:00Z2009-08-28T13:44:00ZSuppose your BizTalk Maps are present in assemblies that are large (let’s say that 5 mb and above can be considered as large). You might run into the situation where the memory consumption of the BizTalk Host Instances executing such maps (either within an Orchestration, or on a Receive Port) grows quite large. If you do, then we’d like you to let you know that we’ve recently released a hotfix for BizTalk 2006 R2 (and are in the process of releasing one for BizTalk 2006 shortly). Try it out ( http://support.microsoft.com/kb/975118...(<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/08/28/huge-memory-consumption-when-executing-maps-present-in-large-assemblies.aspx">read more</a>)<img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9888400" width="1" height="1">mdoctorhttp://blogs.msdn.com/members/mdoctor.aspxhttp://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/08/01/specifying-a-listenuri-for-a-wcf-adapter-receive-location.aspx2009-08-01T22:29:00Z2009-08-01T22:29:00ZWhen configuring a receive location using the WCF-Custom adapter, there is a textbox for specifying the endpoint address on the General tab of the configuration dialogs. There is however no field where you can specify values for the ListenUri and ListenUriMode values for the endpoint. One way is to write a custom endpoint behavior which can set these values on the endpoint. However, when I attempted to do so, I realized that it didn’t work – no matter where I tried modifying the ServiceEndpoint.ListenUri...(<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/mdoctor/archive/2009/08/01/specifying-a-listenuri-for-a-wcf-adapter-receive-location.aspx">read more</a>)<img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9855316" width="1" height="1">mdoctorhttp://blogs.msdn.com/members/mdoctor.aspx