OracleConnection: what are Clearpool, Dispose and Close? - c#

I would like to understand what does Clearpool, Dispose, Close do in OracleConnection?
After exception occurs, I would like to get rid off the current connection and create a total new connection with the same connection string. How should I get rid off the old connection?
Should l clearpool firstly or dispose the connection? And what does clearpool vs dispose/close do?
My current code is like below:
public virtual void Dispose()
{
try
{
_connection.Close();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
}
finally
{
_connection.Dispose();
_connection.ClearPool();
_connection = null;
}
}

The easiest way to solve this is to create the connection inside a using block. Everything inside that block will be disposed whenever the block execution finishes. Also, do NOT leave a catch with no action inside. This might end on a silent exception that you will be not aware of.
using(OracleConnection conn = new OracleConnection("yourConnStr"))
{
//ALL YOUR LOGIC INSIDE
}

Related

C# transaction with handled exception will still roll back?

Considering this piece of code:
using(TransactionScope tran = new TransactionScope()) {
insertStatementMethod1();
insertStatementMethod2();
// this might fail
try {
insertStatementMethod3();
} catch (Exception e) {
// nothing to do
}
tran.Complete();
}
Is anything done in insertStatementMethod1 and insertStatementMethod2 going to be rolled back? In any case?
If I want them to execute anyway, I would need to check if it insertStatementMethod3 will fail before the transaction, and build my transaction code based on that?
Update
The code looks similar to this
using(TransactionScope tran = new TransactionScope()) {
// <standard code>
yourExtraCode();
// <standard code>
tran.Complete();
}
where I get to write the yourExtraCode() method
public void yourExtraCode() {
insertStatementMethod1();
insertStatementMethod2();
// this call might fail
insertStatementMethod3();
}
I can only edit the yourExtraCode() method, so I cannot chose to be in the transaction scope or no. One simple possible solution would be this:
public void yourExtraCode() {
insertStatementMethod1();
insertStatementMethod2();
// this call might fail
if (findOutIfIcanInsert()) { // <-- this would come by executing sql query
try {
insertStatementMethod3();
} catch (Exception e) {
// nothing to do
}
}
}
But that would come with the need of looking up things in the db which would affect performance.
Is there a better way, or I need to find out before I'd call the method?
I tried out and, of course the transaction was rolled back as expected.
If you don't want your first two methods to be transacted, just move them out from the ambient transaction's scope.
If you don't have control over the code which starts an ambient transaction, you can suppress it by creating a new ambient transaction: using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Suppress)).

Is Rollback automatic in a "Using" scope with C# SQL Server calls?

When you create 'using' blocks for your SQL Connection, Transaction, and Command, it is well known that the connection, transaction, or command that the using block is associated with is disposed on its own properly after you leave the using block.
If an exception occurs in one of these blocks though, for instance in the command block - Would the transaction be rolled back on its own, or do developers need to do a try catch inside of the command 'using' block, and add a rollback transaction statement in the catch for this try?
The transaction is rolled back automatically as long as you haven't successfully called Commit. So your using blocks can look something like this, and the transaction will be rolled back if an exception is thrown before the Commit.
using (IDbConnection connection = ...)
{
connection.Open();
using (IDbTransaction transaction = connection.BeginTransaction())
{
using (IDbCommand command = ...)
{
command.Connection = connection;
command.Transaction = transaction;
...
}
...
transaction.Commit();
}
}
It's not guaranteed to get disposed. The Dispose(bool) method of the SqlTransaction will in fact roll it back conditionally:
// System.Data.SqlClient.SqlTransaction
protected override void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
if (disposing)
{
SNIHandle target = null;
RuntimeHelpers.PrepareConstrainedRegions();
try
{
target = SqlInternalConnection.GetBestEffortCleanupTarget(this._connection);
if (!this.IsZombied && !this.IsYukonPartialZombie)
{
this._internalTransaction.Dispose();
}
}
catch (OutOfMemoryException e)
{
this._connection.Abort(e);
throw;
}
catch (StackOverflowException e2)
{
this._connection.Abort(e2);
throw;
}
catch (ThreadAbortException e3)
{
this._connection.Abort(e3);
SqlInternalConnection.BestEffortCleanup(target);
throw;
}
}
base.Dispose(disposing);
}
and if you notice, it would only happen if this._internalTransaction.Dispose(); got called. The problem here is that if GetBestEffortCleanupTarget throws an exception it won't get cleaned up.
In your case, as long as an exception isn't thrown as already stated, you will fall into the category of being Zombied and so it will then actually issue a Rollback call in the _internalTransaction.Dispose() call.
Finally, if this is called with false it will most certainly not get disposed.
Now, unless I'm really missing something here I'm a bit appalled at how fragile this code is.
An interesting note is that I think the MSDN documentation is actually wrong because it states, for the Rollback() method:
The transaction can only be rolled back from a pending state (after BeginTransaction has been called, but before Commit is called). The transaction is rolled back in the event it is disposed before Commit or Rollback is called.

ADO.NET Funny Connection Pool Behaviour when bury SQL Exception

I am catching a sql exception and not rethrowing it. This seems to mean that the connection is not returned to the pool as I would expect. Is this possible?
using (IDbCommand paymentCommand = this.Connection.CreateCommand())
{
try
{
//database stuff
}
catch (SqlException ex)
{
//LOG CALL
}
}
why don't you put using(...){} inside try{} block? This way even if exception is thrown, using block will dispose off IDBcmd obj.
It's not clear in your question how you are creating the connection, but you do need to make sure you Open it, then Close it, regardless of errors or not.
Typically I'll do something like this:
SqlConnection connection = null;
try {
connection.Open();
// Do stuff like run a query, setup your IDbCommand, etc.
} catch (Exception ex) {
// Log error
} finally {
if (connection != null) {
connection.Close();
}
}
This way, no matter what happens, your connection will be closed and returned to the pool. If you fail to Close(), you'll "leak" that connection and eventually run out of pooled connections to draw from. The lifetime of the connection should generally only be as long as it takes to issue your sql command, at which point you should be closing it.
It's not clear what you are experiencing with the connection pool. However, I would definitely wrap your connection in a using statement.
This is what I usually use (note that dac.GetConnection() is simply a class that centralizes the code to get a connection object):
using (SqlConnection connection = dac.GetConnection())
{
using (SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand("myProc", connection))
{
command.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure;
try
{
connection.Open();
//add params, run query
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
//handle/log errror
}
finally
{
if (connection.State == ConnectionState.Open)
connection.Close();
}
}
}

Is Close on database connection calling here?

I got this code:
try
{
using (OracleConnection c = new OracleConnection(globalDict[byAlias(connAlias)].connString))
{
c.Open();
using (OracleCommand recordExistentQuery = new OracleCommand("regular.IsExistent", c))
{
// here working on oraclecommand
}
}
} catch(Exception exc) { }
OracleConnection is class of devArt dotConnect for Oracle.
Will this code call c.Close() when it goes out of (OracleConnection c = new OracleConnection(globalDict[byAlias(connAlias)].connString)) { .... } ?
No, it will call Dipose(). A using block will implicitly call Dispose() on the object specified in the using statement.
But often times for a database connection, Dispose() handles the Close() functionality, releasing the connection/processId that keeps a connection.
I would also like to add that in the event of an exception somewhere in your //here working on oraclecommand (basically inside your using(...){ } statement, Dispose() will also be called.
By design, you should be able to make multiple to calls to an object implementing IDisposable. In your case, issuing a calling a call to Close() after your using block of code will simply do nothing, as the connection has already closed/been returned to the pool. Any additional calls after the object has cleaned up should just return and do nothing.

If I catch exceptions inside a using statement for a SqlConnection, does the using still handle closing and disposing my connection?

I'm going through some old C#.NET code in an ASP.NET application making sure that all SqlConnections are wrapped in using blocks.
This piece of code used to open cn and da and close and dispose them in both the catch block and the end of the method. I added the usings and can't figure out for certain if the using blocks still handle disposing of the connection if an exception is thrown in the try and caught in the catch. This question seems to suggest that it does.
using (SqlConnection cn = new SqlConnection(Global.sDSN))
{
using (SqlDataAdapter da = new SqlDataAdapter())
{
// do some stuff
try
{
// do stuff that might throw exceptions
}
catch (catch (System.Exception e)
{
//return something here
// can I ditch these because the using's handle it?
da.Dispose();
cn.Close();
cn.Dispose();
return msg;
}
}
}
Yes, they will. They're basically turned into a finally block.
So something like this:
using (SqlConnection cn = new SqlConnection(Global.sDSN))
{
....
}
is really turned into:
SqlConnection cn = new SqlConnection(Global.sDSN)
try
{
....
}
finally
{
cn.Dispose();
}
more or less - and the finally block is always executed, no matter what might have happened before in the try {.....} block.
When you use a using clause this is what's happening:
myobject = new object();
try{
// do something with myobject
}finally{
myobject.Dispose();
}
Hope this helps,
Best regards,
Tom.

Categories

Resources