Sponsorer

1. Sponsorer

2. Tack till

3. 18:00 - ”BizTalk Tips och Trix” Mikael Sand 19:00 - Paus, mingel, diskussioner 19:30 - ”Kanoniskadatamodeller” Johan Tuvstedt 20:00 – ”Lösningar för att mocka en port”Johan Hedberg Agenda

4. 3:e oktober “Effektivsystemdokumentationiettintegrationsprojekt”Richard Hallgren “BizTalk IaaS, PaaS – HybridbaseradeIntegrationslösningar med BizTalk lokaltoch/ellerimolnet”Michael Olsson Nästa Event

7. Johan Hedberg, Enfo Zystems http://blogical.se/blogs/johan johan@jeh.se / johan.hedberg@enfo.se @JoHed Ways to mock a send port

8. Goals • Raise awareness of options • Present different solutions to mock a send port • Consider how they differentiate • Discuss Pros and Cons • Talk about how they accomplish the work • Look at (some) code and implementation logic

9. Photo by moyogo @flickr

10. Session Agenda • Introduction • What is mocking? • Why Mock a Send Port? • Solutions

11. Photo by Dan Holtmeyer @flickr

12. What is the problem?

13. What is mocking? • In this context... • ”Mocking is the simulation of an system or service that mimics the behavior of the target system or service”

14. Why do we Mock something? • PoC • Test • Isolation • Parallell development • Cost savings

15. What should we be careful with? • Treating mock as the real thing • Plan for the development and maintenance • Don’t overdo it, KISS

16. Solutions • Core adapters • Null adapter • Orchestration • Web Page/Service • Custom Adapters and Bindings • Frameworks and Tools

17. FILE Adapter • Replacing the ports adapter with the FILE/MSMQ/MQ/etc. adapter • Pros: • Easy • Close copy to actual port configuration • Allows access to output • Cons: • One-Way • Limited flexibility • WCF Behaviors etc

18. NULL Adapter • Replacing the ports adapter with the NULL adapter • Pros: • Easy-ish • Close copy to actual port configuration • Cons: • One-Way • No access to output • Limited flexibility • WCF Behaviors etc • Requires adapter development/install

19. NULL Pipeline • Replacing the ports pipeline with a consuming pipeline • Pros: • Easy-ish • Cons: • One-Way • Greater config differences • No access to output • Limited flexibility • WCF Behaviors etc • Requires pipeline and pipeline component development/install

20. Orchestration • Creating one orchestration per send port oprtation to simulate response • Pros: • Easy • Flexible • One-Way and Solicit-Response • Context properties • No port/adapter latency • Cons: • Requires developer resources • One orchestration per send port could result in many additional orchestrations • Limited to MsgBox measurements • Far away from the actual configuration

21. Generic Orchestration • Creating a generic orchestration that can handle all send ports • Based on a convoy pattern and configuration (?) • Pros: • Flexible • One-Way and Solicit-Response • Context properties • No port/adapter latency • Cons: • Requires custom development • Limited to MsgBox measurements • Configuration/rule heavy • Needs to be built to your (pre-determined and generic) subscription filters • Far away from the actual configuration

22. ASP.Net Page • Creating a HTTP page hosted in IIS called by a HTTP send port • Pros: • Easy • One-Way and Solicit-Response • Possible access to output if coded • Cons: • Limited flexibility • IIS Install/Deployment • WCF Behaviors etc

23. WebService • Creating a WCF Service called by a WCF send port • Pros: • Flexible • One-Way and Solicit-Response • WCF Behaviors • One port independent of no of operations • As close to actual configuration (of a webservice) as you can get • Cons: • Install/Deploy • Context properties

24. BizTalk Adapter (Adapter Framework) • Creating an adapter using the Adapter Framework toact as the mock message factory • Pros: • Flexible • Can control context properties • No latency to service calls • No additional components outside BizTalk • Cons: • Big difference from WCF configuration • Custom Adapter development

25. WCF Channel [Binding] • Adding a custom channel to the channelstack to act as the mock message factory • Paolo Salvatori has a sample of this technique at http://blogs.msdn.com/b/paolos/archive/2011/04/05/how-to-use-a-wcf-custom-channel-to-implement-client-side-caching.aspx • Pros: • Close to actual configuration • No latency to service calls • No additional deployment outside BizTalk • Cons: • Non-trivial development of channel and behavior

26. BizTalk Adapter (LOB SDK) [Binding] • Creating a custom LOB Adapter SDK Adapter toact as the mock message factory • There is a tutorial showing how to develop an LOB EchoAdapter that takes you step by step through this technique at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb798134(v=bts.10) • Pros: • Close to actual configuration • No latency to service calls • No additional deployment outside BizTalk • Cons: • Custom Adapter/Binding Development

27. SoapUI • SoapUI is a popular tool to test webservices that can also create mock services • Pros: • If you are confomfortable using SoapUI • A commercial tool – support • Promotes a contract first approach • Cons: • If you are not comfortable using SoapUI • A commercial tool – cost • Need to re-generate service on contract changes

28. (BizMock) • BizMock is a framework for testing Orchestrations, Schemas, Maps and Pipelines by writing Visual Studio c# unit tests • Available at http://bizmock.codeplex.com/ • Pros: • Allows unit tests of orchestrations • Not really in focus for this discussion

29. (Mocking BizTalk) • Is a collection of pipeline components that trigger boo scripts that can perform work like promoting context properties. • Pros: • Cool sample of very Dynamic pipeline components • Allows context property promotion • Cons: • Not really mocking in itself • boo language

30. MockingBird • Uses a service simulator (HTTP Handler or WCF interceptor) to return a response • Available at http://mockingbird.codeplex.com/ • Pros: • Easy enough • No development effort • No cost of purchase • WSDL based Mock service simulator config generation • WSDL based Mock request and responses generation • Cons: • Easy enough? • Support?