Charles Young

  Home  |   Contact  |   Syndication    |   Login
  193 Posts | 64 Stories | 508 Comments | 373 Trackbacks

News

Twitter












Article Categories

Archives

Post Categories

Image Galleries

Alternative Feeds

BizTalk Bloggers

BizTalk Sites

CEP Bloggers

CMS Bloggers

Fun

Other Bloggers

Rules Bloggers

SharePoint Bloggers

Utilities

WF Bloggers

Windows Workflow Foundation

Microsoft Windows Workflow Foundation (WWF) is an extensible framework for developing workflow solutions on the Windows platform. It provides both an API and tools for the development and execution of workflow-based applications. Windows Workflow Foundation provides a single, unified model to create end-to-end solutions that span categories of applications, including human workflow and system workflow.

I’ve been asked a few times how the performance of WF (Windows Workflow Foundation) Rules compares with that of the Microsoft Business Rules Engine (MS BRE). Having done no testing, I could only guess at the answer. I’ve now undertaken some initial performance testing to compare WF and MS BRE, and decided to publish the results.


I got an email today requesting help in deciding the appropriate selection of rule processing technology for a workflow application. I’ve got requests like this before, so I’ve decided to post a reply publically.


The compensation model in BizTalk Server 2004 provides a versatile mechanism for addressing an extensive range of business process scenarios. It is used in situations where some condition arises that invalidates the outcomes of previously completed units of work associated with the same business activity. In these scenarios, it is generally necessary to revisit the completed units of work, inspecting the state of the system as it existed at the completion of each of those stages, and taking appr


Windows Workflow Foundation (WF) rules are executed through a sequential, rather than an 'inferencing' engine. Although WF rule processing bears a superficial resemblance to rule processing in the MS BRE, there are profound differences. This article attempts to explain the fundamental differences, and to provide some insight into the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.