"Received unexpected message type"

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

2004-08-26 15:49:35 UTC

I currently have two different versions of the same orchestrations that I am
trying to deploy side by side. The solution contains one assembly with the
orchestration (workflow.dll) and one with the message schemas (schemas.dll).
So, I have the following assemblies deployed:

workflow.dll, version=2.2.0.0
schemas.dll, version=2.2.0.0

workflow.dll, version=3.2.0.0
schemas.dll, version=3.2.0.0

Since the schemas specify the same namespaces, I have follow the advice of
Christof and others in these newsgroups and created a custom receive pipline
so that the 2.2.0.0 orchestration specifies only the 2.2.0.0 schemas and the
3.2.0.0 orchestration only specifies the 3.2.0.0 schemas. When I send an
activating message to the version 2.2.0.0 receive location, an orchestration
instance is created and it works fine. However, when I send an activating
message to the 3.2.0.0 receive location, I get the following error:

Failed to initialize the correlation property name: ReviewID namespace:
http://<...>.PropertySchema from message: InitiateWorkflowInstance.

Received unexpected message type '<...>.InitiateWorkflow, <...>,
Version=2.2.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=d4608ffbaa057232' does not
match expected type '<...>.InitiateWorkflow, <...>, Version=3.2.0.0,
Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=d4608ffbaa057232'.

I thought that the custom pipeline would cure this, but now I am wondering
if this sort of side-by-side deployment of schemas is possible. Any help
would be appreciated.

Dan

Narasimhan Padmanabhan (MSFT)

2004-08-26 20:01:11 UTC

Permalink

2004-08-26 20:17:12 UTC

Permalink

They are different. Anyways, I have actually found the problem. It turns
out that my 3.2.0.0 bindings were slightly incorrect in that the receive
port was configured to use the 2.2.0.0 custom pipeline (D'oh!). With the
corrected bindings it's working fine now.

Thanks for your response, though!
Dan

Post by Narasimhan Padmanabhan (MSFT)
Are the receive locations for these two versions the same location or a
different one?
Thanks!
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
EBusiness Server Team
--------------------
|>>Subject: "Received unexpected message type"
|>>Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:49:35 -0400
|>>Lines: 42
|>>X-Priority: 3
|>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
|>>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
|>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
|>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.biztalk.general
|>>NNTP-Posting-Host: host122.covarity.com 216.16.237.122

cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP11

Post by Narasimhan Padmanabhan (MSFT)
phx.gbl
|>>Xref: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl microsoft.public.biztalk.general:19037
|>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.biztalk.general
|>>
|>>I currently have two different versions of the same orchestrations that
I am
|>>trying to deploy side by side. The solution contains one assembly with
the
|>>orchestration (workflow.dll) and one with the message schemas
(schemas.dll).
|>>
|>>workflow.dll, version=2.2.0.0
|>>schemas.dll, version=2.2.0.0
|>>
|>>workflow.dll, version=3.2.0.0
|>>schemas.dll, version=3.2.0.0
|>>
|>>Since the schemas specify the same namespaces, I have follow the advice
of
|>>Christof and others in these newsgroups and created a custom receive
pipline
|>>so that the 2.2.0.0 orchestration specifies only the 2.2.0.0 schemas and
the
|>>3.2.0.0 orchestration only specifies the 3.2.0.0 schemas. When I send an
|>>activating message to the version 2.2.0.0 receive location, an
orchestration
|>>instance is created and it works fine. However, when I send an activating
|>>
|>>http://<...>.PropertySchema from message: InitiateWorkflowInstance.
|>>
|>>Received unexpected message type '<...>.InitiateWorkflow, <...>,
|>>Version=2.2.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=d4608ffbaa057232' does
not
|>>match expected type '<...>.InitiateWorkflow, <...>, Version=3.2.0.0,
|>>Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=d4608ffbaa057232'.
|>>
|>>
|>>I thought that the custom pipeline would cure this, but now I am
wondering
|>>if this sort of side-by-side deployment of schemas is possible. Any help
|>>would be appreciated.
|>>
|>>Dan
|>>
|>>
|>>
|>>
|>>
|>>
|>>
|>>
|>>
|>>