BAM: don’t use spaces in view names!

if you’re familiair with BAM in BizTalk 2004, it is easy to notice the changes between 2004 and 2006 while setting up a BAM environment in BizTalk 2006.


Changes can be found for example when defining the activities and views. Besides textual changes (on for example buttons) I found out that it is no longer prohibited to use spaces in the names of activities and views. I thought that was a nice improvement to increase readibility.


I still feel that way, but it turned out not to be so handy when you want to remove the views with the BM tool. When you try to remove a view with a space in the name, it gently informs you that such a view doesn’t exist! In the BM tool in 2004 it was also possible to remove deployments based on a number, but in 2006 that is no longer the case. Strangely you can view the changes but not remove them anymore.


I tried to remove the views using the stored procedures in the BAMPrimaryImport but I couldn’t find an SP to remove the view. I did find one to remove an activity, but there seem to be none for views.


Finally I decided to remove tables, views and so from the database. Obviously that isn’t a nice way to solve it.


Does anyone know how to remove a view with a space in its name?

BAM portal (no) views

In the past I worked on BAM with BizTalk 2004. Now I’m on a project with BizTalk 2006 and again I’m the one to do the BAM part.


I played a bit with BAM and 2006 but nothing serious. I under the impression the way BAM in BizTalk 2006 works, or at least the way to create activities and views wasn’t changed drastically.


So I went for a basic BAM implementation to get to know the implementation chain. A simple activity in an simple view and the view should show up in the BAM portal. And you can guess it…..it didn’t work. There was no view in the view-list and nothing in the eventlog to help me with this. In these scenario’s Google is my best friend, so I searched on Biztalk 2006 BAM and “no view to display”. I ended up with only result: http://blogs.msdn.com/tihot/archive/2006/06/13/630313.aspx


This also didn’t fix the issue.


At the end I suddenly remembered that in 2004 was also necessary to define accounts on the views so users had rights to view them. That actually solved the issue.