Stream processing saves programs from having to load data entirely into memory.
Instead, a program gets a hold on a stream instead of the actual data. The program then starts asking the stream to send a chunk of the data. The program does the required processing on this chunk, and then asks for another chunk…this goes on until the entire stream is read and processed.
This has the very important advantage of not having to load the entire message at once into the program’s memory space. By reading data in chunk, only the size of the chunk that is being processes is loaded into memory.
In systems under load and where scalability is a concern, this can have a huge influence on the success these systems.
This post, explains how stream processing is implemented in BizTalk Server, and how to take advantage of streaming to build better BizTalk applications.
Stream Processing Support in BizTalk
BizTalk implements a forward-only streaming design. Forward-only means that the stream can only be read, and cannot be seeked back.
Stream processing is used across BizTalk:
–Out of the box pipelines are stream-based; they utilize streaming when fetching data from the adapter and as data passes from one stage to another. For example, out-of-the box components such as the Flat-File Disassembler and the XML Disassembler, are built with streaming in mind.
When writing custom pipeline components, although harder to implement, you should use the streaming approach instead of loading the entire data into memory; especially for systems that will be under heavy load. This module takes an in-depth look at pipeline stream programming.
–Orchestrations also support streaming. When calling .NET components from within an OX, streaming can also be used to improve Ox performance. Since this discussion requires the understanding of Ox engine, I will discuss streaming support in orchestrations in the business process module.
–Mapping also supports streaming. By default, XSLT typically requires loading messages into memory to perform transformation; which obviously contradicts with BizTalk streaming model. As such, BizTalk implements virtual streaming for mappers. If a message size is over 1MB, BizTalk virtual streaming writes the data into a temporary file, and this file is now used as the stream source instead of memory. This introduces I/O overhead, but still much better than any potential memory issues. This might not be very clear yet, but I will discuss Virtual Streaming later.
–BAM introduces significant overhead over BizTalk because its constantly saving data into the BAM database. To reduce this overhead, BAM contains a set of event streams.
Streaming in Pipelines
When used in pipeline components, stream processing solves two major issues:
–First, as I said before, it reduces memory consumption by not loading the entire data into memory
–A second advantage, is that it speeds up processing, because the next component does not have to wait for the current component to finish processing the entire message.
Instead, the current component passes to the next component the portion of the stream it has finished processing, and starts working on the next portion.
The No-Streaming Approach
To best appreciate the value of streaming, lets assume that you have a built a custom pipeline, and in its various stages, you have created custom pipeline components without adopting the streaming approach.
–An adapter which is listening for data on the wire, creates a new BizTalk message of type IBaseMessage and if there are any message parts, also creates parts of type IBasePart. It then attaches the data stream to this message and promotes context properties related to the receive endpoint. The adapter then submits the message to the pipeline.
Now before going on, make sure you understood this. Note, that the adapter has not actually read the data from the wire. It just created a message type that BizTalk can understand, and it only attached the data stream to that message, but no data has been read yet.
–Now the first component of the first stage in the pipeline gets the message. At this moment, the component reads the entire data stream attached to the memory at once. This effectively loads the entire message into memory. The component will do whatever processing required, then it creates another stream componsed of the new data and passes it along to the other component in the pipeline chain.
–Now this other component, again reads the entire data stream at once, causing the entire to message to be loaded into memory again, does the required processing, creates a new stream, and passes it along to the next component
this process continues until all components of the pipeline are executed and the final message is submitted by the Message Agent to the MessageBox.
Now this should give you an idea about how bad such design will perform, especially for big size messages and systems with high load. This alone, can cause your system to break.
Actually, this is the most used approach by pipeline developers since it’s the easiest.
What is also bad, is that although out-of-the box pipeline components such as the XMLDisassembler or XmlValidator implement streaming; if you create a custom pipeline and mix these components with your own custom components that are not utilizing streaming; then this breaks up the streaming chain, and again loads the entire message into memory.
The Streaming Approach
Now lets see how streaming would change how data is processed, and how this affects the overall performance.
–The adapter, attaches the data stream to the IBaseMessage, and passes it to the pipeline.
–The first component receives the message. Now, again remember that the message has the data stream attached to it, but the data has not actually been read yet. This component then wraps the message with a custom stream; without reading any part of it. Now the message with the new stream attached, is passed on to the next component.
–The next component does the same: it wraps yet another new stream around the one passed to it, and again passes on the message to the next stage.
Now the message has a chain of two streams attached to it…and still no data has been read yet.
The message goes through the same process, while going through all pipeline components.
–Finally, it’s the EPM that calls the stream’s Read() method. At this moment, the call gets propagated through all those custom streams that have been wrapped around the message by the pipeline component, all the way to the main data stream of the adapter.
–The adapter then performs the first actual data read and passes it along the stream to the first component.
–Each pipeline component then executes its own implementation of the Read() method on that specific stream chunk it receives.
–After passing through all components, this stream chunk is then handed to the EPM which hands it over to the Message Agent.
This continues until the stream is read entirely and the message is stored in the MessageBox.
Once the message is stored entirely in the MessageBox, the EPM notifies the adapter so that it performs resources cleanup; for example, a File adapter deletes the file and a SQL Adapter disposes the connection.
On the send side, the Message Agent hands the adapter, a reference to the message. The adapter then starts pulling the stream from the messagebox and through the send pipeline. Data is then sent to the wire is a streaming fashion.
So why do you care about understanding streams? Well beyond the fact that’s cool to understand things, this affects how you design your pipeline components.
To test the performance difference when using the streaming vs. non-streaming approach, I created
a pipeline component which uses the memory approach (non-streaming). nothing special about its Execute method, it just acts as a passthrough component:
Next I created, a custom pipeline component that uses streaming.
First. I created a custom stream class which derives from System.IO.Stream:
The reason for this, is that I need to provide my own implementation of the Read method.
Recall from when I explained stream processing, that the Read method gets called by the EPM to trigger the start of stream processing.
Its within this Read method that you provide the logic that you want to perform; however, recall that here you are processing just a chunk of the stream and not the entire message.
Now again, for this demo, I am just passing the data along with no processing…so here I am simply returning the same set of bytes unchanged.
In this case, in the Execute method of the Icomponent interface, and unlike the previous component, where the entire message is loaded memory;
here I just wrap the incoming body stream with my custom stream implementation and then replace the stream with the result of my custom implementation:
Remember that at the first pass of pipeline components, the execute method just creates a new wrapper stream.
When all components do so, finally the Read method, is executed where each stream is processed and data is updated.
To run the sample, in my BizTalk application, I have a receive location which is configured to use the pipeline using the in-memory approach.
In my file system, I have created a large message, which is around 120 Meg.
Before dropping this file into the in folder, I examined how much memory is the Biztalk host instance process consuming; it was nearly 18K:
When I dropped the file, I examineD the memory consumed while the host instance is pulling the file. I could see the memory increasing until nearly hitting 300 K…so going from 18k to 300k for consuming a single file of 120 Megs:
I then changed the pipeline used in my receive location to the one utilizing streaming.
After dropping the file again and checking the host instance processes…I could see its rising to nearly 54 K…so there is a difference of around 250 K of memory between the first and second approach:
Now imagine, what this means for a project that is receiving thousands of messages who in real world can be much larger than 120 Meg…
Out of the Box Streams
Besides writing your own stream implementations, BizTalk provides out of the box stream implementations in the the Microsoft.BizTalk.Streaming assembly:
–EventingReadStream is an abstract stream class, which allows you to hook up event handlers to certain events, such as the first and last stream chunk reads. Classes such as ForwardOnlyEventingReadStream extend this class, as shown by this example.
–VirtualStream is probably the most used out-of-the box stream because its simple to use. Here, data is still held in memory – as if you are using the in-memory approach – however, this happens only until data size exceeds a configured value; at which stage it is written into a disk file. And from this moment, the disk file becomes the stream source.
You can think of VirtualStream as being somewhat similar to the MemoryStream, however it uses a disk file for data storage instead of memory.
So, the VirtualStream solves the problem of loading large data into memory – in the expense of I/O overhead. Despite this I/O overhead, still its much better than any memory problems.
If implementing custom streams – for whatever reason – is not an option, or at least a very difficult option to implement, then this stream is your safest bet.
–The ReadOnlySeekableStream provides seekable read-only access to a stream.
This example, shows how to use VirtualStream and ReadOnlySeekableStream together, to wrap the original stream:
This will result in the VirtualStream saving data into a temporary file system. And the ReadOnlySeekableStream, providing seekable readonly access to the stream
You can see all stream implementations inside the Microsoft.BizTalk.Streaming assembly using the following URL:
Best Practices Accessing Stream Data
We already discussed how streams is a much better option to use in pipeline components as opposed to using XmlDocument which loads the entire message into memory.
So since we cannot use the known methods of XmlDocument such SelectNodes and SelectSingleNode, what options do we have natively from BizTalk Server that will help us navigate the message?
Microsoft.BizTalk.XPathReader assembly provides the XPathReader and XPathCollection classes.
Below is an example, that shows how these classes can be used to navigate the stream after it has been wrapped by the VirtualStream and ReadOnlySeekableStream:
Of course you can use classes such as XPathReader and XPathCollection, on any stream; including custom streams such as the one I have showed you before.
Streaming Support in Orchestrations
The other place, where streaming plays an important role and affects the way you design your code, is inside Oxs.
However, since this requires the knowledge of Ox XLANG engine, streaming in Oxs will be discussed in a future post.
Apparently BizTalk uses XLST 1.0 which does not support streaming. XSLT 2.0 does.
Are you sure that the BizTalk mapper performs streaming ? Do you have any Microsoft official links confirming this ?
Hi, yes, streaming is supported. As I said, it’s virtual streaming which is not the perfect solution as it incurs I/O overhead – but a better option than non-streaming. Check this link, go to section “Factors that affect the processing of large messages” –> “Type of message processing” –> “Mapping”. It says “BizTalk Server significantly improves memory management for large documents by implementing a configurable message size threshold for loading documents into memory during transforms. Any message with a size below this threshold is handled in memory; any message with a size above this threshold is buffered to the file system to reduce memory requirements. The default message size threshold is 1 MB.” …which is the virtual streaming mechanism i talked about.
Thanks for your reply.
According to you which of the following solutions will be the fastest if small messages need to be mapped:
1. BizTalk mapper with some standard functoids
2. Mapping in C# code
Thanks in advance for your reply
well, although your question seems simple, but it isn’t. when you say ‘fastest’, there are multiple attributes to what make one option perform better than the other, mainly processing speed and memory. so there are many considerations here:
– biztalk mapper will always pay the cost of loading using the mapper with the XSLTs into memory, but you say that the message is small, so will this cost be negligible?
– how did you implement your own code? are you using object-to-object mapping or are you using a custom created XSLT?
– in your code, are you using streaming, or loading data into memory?
In general, in my opinion the most correct answer that i can give you is: go ahead and test it. probably it’s not the answer you wanted to hear, but as an architect, in my opinion that’s the most accurate answer. too many variables to answer this in a firm manner.
I confirm the our messages are of small size.
We have generated C# code from the XML schema and are doing object to object mapping using static classes.
Initially, we were using the XmlDocument class to retrieve our data from BizTalk orchestrations. We have recently started using the XLangMessage class.
Based on these elements and your gut feeling, do you think our way of doing could be faster than doing mapping in a BizTalk map ?