Transactions and nested Transactions in C# - c#

I read a lot of articles on Transaction but I want to build my own example of nested Transactions to see how it really works in c#. I already have a good idea about them in SQl but C# is giving me a tough time. SO I came here for an example that can explain how Nested Transactions work.
I tried the following code to check if the inner transaction will be committed or not. Since the TransactionScope property is RequiresNew the inner transaction should execute but I introduced a deliberate Unique key violation in outer Transaction and my inner transaction didn't execute. Why? Is my concept messed up?
Database _Cataloguedatabase = DatabaseFactory.CreateDatabase();
public void TransferAmountSuppress(Account a)
{
var option = new TransactionOptions();
option.IsolationLevel = System.Transactions.IsolationLevel.ReadCommitted;
try
{
using (TransactionScope outerScope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.RequiresNew, option))
{
using (DbCommand cmd = _Cataloguedatabase.GetStoredProcCommand(SpUpdateCredit))
{
_Cataloguedatabase.AddInParameter(cmd, CreditAmountParameter, DbType.String, a.Amount);
_Cataloguedatabase.AddInParameter(cmd, CodeParameter, DbType.String, a.Code);
_Cataloguedatabase.ExecuteNonQuery(cmd);
}
using (TransactionScope innerScope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.RequiresNew, option))
{
using (DbCommand cmd = _Cataloguedatabase.GetStoredProcCommand(SpUpdateDebit))
{
_Cataloguedatabase.AddInParameter(cmd, DebitAmountParameter, DbType.String, a.Amount);
_Cataloguedatabase.ExecuteNonQuery(cmd);
}
innerScope.Complete();
}
outerScope.Complete();
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
throw new FaultException(new FaultReason(new FaultReasonText(ex.Message)));
}
}

Related

Begin transaction with 2 DBContexts

The idea : I am trying to run an insertion to 2 databases using 2 different dbContext, the goal is to allow a role back on the insertion from both QBs in case of an exception from ether one of the insertions.
My code:
using (var db1 = new DbContext1())
{
db1.Database.Connection.Open();
using (var trans = db1.Database.Connection.BeginTransaction())
{
//do the insertion into db1
db1.SaveChanges();
using (var db2 = new DbContext2())
{
//do the insertions into db2
db2.SaveChanges();
}
trans.Commit();
}
}
On the first call to save changes: db1.SaveChanges(); I get an invalid operation exception : sqlconnection does not support parallel transactions
I tried figuring out what does it exactly mean, why does it happen and how to solve it but haven't been able to achieve that.
So my questions are:
What does it exactly mean? and why do I get this exception?
How can I solve it?
Is there a way to use the begin transaction is a different way that won't cause this error?
Also, is this the proper way to use begin transaction or should I do something different?
***For clarification, I am using the db1.Database.Connection.Open(); because otherwise I get an "connection is close" error.
Instead of trying to strech your connection and transaction across two DbContext, you may go for handling your connection and transaction outside of your DbContext, something like this :
using (var conn = new System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection("yourConnectionString"))
{
conn.Open();
using (var trans = conn.BeginTransaction())
{
try
{
using (var dbc1 = new System.Data.Entity.DbContext(conn, contextOwnsConnection: false))
{
dbc1.Database.UseTransaction(trans);
// do some work
// ...
dbc1.SaveChanges();
}
using (var dbc2 = new System.Data.Entity.DbContext(conn, contextOwnsConnection: false))
{
dbc2.Database.UseTransaction(trans);
// do some work
// ...
dbc2.SaveChanges();
}
trans.Commit();
}
catch
{
trans.Rollback();
}
}
}
I found out that I was simply abusing the syntax, so to help anyone who may stumble upon this question this is the proper way to do this:
using (var db1 = new DbContext1())
{
using (var trans = db1.Database.BeginTransaction())
{
try
{
//do the insertion into db1
db1.SaveChanges();
using (var db2 = new DbContext2())
{
//do the insertions into db2
db2.SaveChanges();
}
trans.Commit();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
trans.Rollback();
}
}
}

Nested TransactionScope() won't roll back

I am trying to make use of nested transactions in C# for the first time. In the past I've always wrapped my SqlCommands inside SqlTransactions inside SqlConnections. Something like this:
using (SqlConnection myCon = new SqlConnection(...))
using (SqlTransaction myTran = myCon.BeginTransaction())
{
using (SqlCommand myCom1 = new SqlCommand("...", myCon, myTran))
{
...
}
using (SqlCommand myCom2 = new SqlCommand("...", myCon, myTran))
{
...
}
.
.
.
myTran.Commit();
}
}
All of this, with the necessary try...catch handling of course so if an exception occurs anywhere inside the SqlTransaction, I know that none of the SqlCommands will be committed.
So I thought I'd give TransactionScope a try but it's not working. Here's what I'm doing; I have two transactions, one after the other, but both inside an outer transaction. Depending on which checkbox had been checked on the form, the code throws an exception either:
1. just before the first inner transaction's commit, or
2. between the two inner transactions, or
3. just before the second inner transaction's commit, or
4. just before the outer transaction's commit
The problem I'm getting is that, regardless of which checkbox I tick, the code executes as if no transactions were present. So in other words, the fact that I bug jump out of the try block because of an exception doesn't roll back any of the transactions.
Would appreciate some help. Below is my code for the little test application.
try
{
using (SqlConnection sqlConnection = new SqlConnection(connectionString))
{
sqlConnection.Open();
using (TransactionScope transactionOuter = new TransactionScope())
{
using (TransactionScope transactionInner1 = new TransactionScope())
{
using (SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand("INSERT INTO BasicTable (Value) VALUES ('Inside Inner Transaction 1')", sqlConnection))
{
sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
if (checkBox_FailInner1.Checked)
throw (new Exception("Failed inside inner transaction 1"));
transactionInner1.Complete();
}
if (checkBox_FailBetween.Checked)
throw (new Exception("Failed between inner transactions"));
using (TransactionScope transactionInner2 = new TransactionScope())
{
using (SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand("INSERT INTO BasicTable (Value) VALUES ('Inside Inner Transaction 2')", sqlConnection))
{
sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
if (checkBox_FailInnner2.Checked)
throw (new Exception("Failed inside inner transaction 2"));
transactionInner2.Complete();
}
if (checkBox_FailOuter.Checked)
throw (new Exception("Failed before outer transaction could commit"));
transactionOuter.Complete();
}
}
}
catch (Exception exc)
{
MessageBox.Show(exc.Message);
}
MessageBox.Show("Done");
A SqlConnection enlists itself when it is opened. Only this point in time matters. The connection will be enlisted into whatever transaction is active at that time. You are opening the connection before any transaction is installed.
I believe you have a 2nd misunderstanding: It is not possible to nest transactions. You can only nest scopes. When you rollback an inner scope, the whole transaction is rolled back. All a TransactionScope does is set and manipulate Transaction.Current. Nothing more. The outermost scope installs a transaction. The inner scopes are mostly no-ops. All they do is provide a way to doom the transaction by not completing them.

TransactionScope has aborted transaction before disposal

When using TransactionScope it apperars that if internally executed code rolled back the transaction than the parent transaction will rollback as well. Which is good for me. But when disposing that scope it throws an exception meaning that transaction was rolled back already and aborted.
So what is the right way to handle that and properly dispose the scope?
using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.RequiresNew))
{
using (var conn = GetConnection())
{
string query =
#"some query that may contain transaction itself
or some SP whith transaction included"
using (var command = new SqlCommand(query, conn))
command.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
}
scope.Complete();
} // Exception here
scope.Dispose() may throw TransactionAborted exception even if scope.Complete() has been called. For example some stored procedures a smart enough to handle exceptions and abort transaction inside T-SQL script using T-SQL TRY/CATCH construct w/o throwing exception to the caller.
So I would consider the safest approach I would suggest is as follows:
try
{
using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.RequiresNew))
{
try
{
using (var conn = GetConnection())
{
string query =
#"some query that may contain transaction itself
or some SP whith transaction included"
using (var command = new SqlCommand(query, conn))
command.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
}
catch (SqlException ex)
{
// log SQL Exception, if any
throw; // re-throw exception
}
scope.Complete();
}
}
catch (TransactionAbortedException ex)
{
// we can get here even if scope.Complete() was called.
// log TransactionAborted exception if necessary
}
And don't worry about disposing TransactionScope. scope.Dispose performs whatever necessary to clean it up before throwing TransactionAborted exception.
I do not use stored procs or SQL-specific try/catch, so my situation was slightly different but I got the exact same transaction aborted exception mentioned in the post. I found that if I have a SELECT somewhere inside the primary TransactionScope, that will cause the Transaction to commit, although I am not sure why. I had a case where in order to create an object in the database it first checked to make sure the object didn't already exist with a SELECT, and then the abort exception occurred when Dispose was called. I looked at the Inner Exception and it said the Transaction was trying to commit without a begin. I finally tried wrapping my SELECT in a Suppressed TransactionScope, and then it worked. So:
using(TransactionScope tx = new TransactionScope())
{
//UPDATE command for logging that I want rolled back if CREATE fails
using(TransactionScope tx2 = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Suppress))
{
// SELECT command
}
//If not exists logic
//CREATE command
} //Used to error here, but not with the SELECT Suppressed
I hope this helps anyone else who might have gotten this exception without using stored procs.
If an exception throws from your inner query the scope.Complete() line 'll not executed.
Please refer the link below.. And I've made some changes to your query also. I hope it should work for you.
Transaction Scope
using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.RequiresNew))
{
using (var conn = GetConnection())
{
string query =
#"some query that may contain transaction itself
or some SP whith transaction included"
using (var command = new SqlCommand(query, conn))
command.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
scope.Complete();
}

When does "SqlConnection does not support parallel transactions" happen?

I have a ton of rather working code that's been here for months and today I saw the following exception logged:
System.InvalidOperationException
SqlConnection does not support parallel transactions.
at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnection.BeginSqlTransaction(
IsolationLevel iso, String transactionName)
at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.BeginTransaction(
IsolationLevel iso, String transactionName)
at my code here
and I'd like to investigate why this exception was thrown. I've read MSDN description of BeginTransaction() and all it says is that well, sometimes this exception can be thrown.
What does this exception mean exactly? What is the deficiency in my code that I should be looking for?
You'll get this if the connection already has an uncommitted transaction and you call BeginTransaction again.
In this example:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("Server=.;Database=TestDb;Trusted_Connection=True;"))
{
conn.Open();
using (var tran = conn.BeginTransaction())
{
using (var cmd = new SqlCommand("INSERT INTO TESTTABLE (test) values ('" + DateTime.Now.ToString() + "')", conn))
{
cmd.Transaction = tran;
cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
using (var tran2 = conn.BeginTransaction()) // <-- EXCEPTION HERE
{
using (var cmd = new SqlCommand("INSERT INTO TESTTABLE (test) values ('INSIDE" + DateTime.Now.ToString() + "')", conn))
{
cmd.Transaction = tran2;
cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
tran2.Commit();
}
tran.Commit();
}
}
}
}
... I get exactly the same exception at the second BeginTransaction.
Make sure the first transaction is committed or rolled back before the next one.
If you want nested transactions, you might find TransactionScope is the way forward.
The same problem occurs when using the 'wrong' method for a transaction, this happened after we upgraded to a newer version of the Entity Framework.
In the past we were using the following method to create a transaction and mixed EF strong typed linq queries with Sql queries, but since the Connection property did not exist anymore, we replaced all db. with db.Database, which was wrong:
// previous code
db.Connection.Open();
using (var transaction = db.Connection.BeginTransaction())
{
// do stuff inside transaction
}
// changed to the following WRONG code
db.Database.Connection.Open();
using (var transaction = db.Database.Connection.BeginTransaction())
{
// do stuff inside transaction
}
Somewhere they changed the behaviour of that transaction method behaviour with a newer version of the Entity Framework and the solution is to use:
db.Database.Connection.Open();
using (var transaction = db.Database.BeginTransaction())
{
// do stuff inside transaction
}
Notice that the transaction is now callen on Database instead of Connection.

using transaction with task parallel library

I have N process to run over SQL Server 2008. If any of the processes fails I need to rollback all the others.
I was thinking to use the TPL creating a parent task and N child task. All of this enclosed with a transactionScope (IsolationLevel.ReadCommitted) but in my example below, the child2 throws an error(customers2 is not a valid table) and the child1 doesn't rolled back.
Am I assuming something wrong here? is there other way to manage this scenario?
Here is my test code:
edit
I modified the code as below using the DependClone on the current transaction. I think is working.
try
{
using (TransactionScope mainTransaction = TransactionUtils.CreateTransactionScope())
{
var parentTransactionClone1 = Transaction.Current.DependentClone(DependentCloneOption.BlockCommitUntilComplete);
var parentTransactionClone2 = Transaction.Current.DependentClone(DependentCloneOption.BlockCommitUntilComplete);
var parentTask = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
var childTask1 = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
using (TransactionScope childScope1 = new TransactionScope(parentTransactionClone1))
{
SqlConnection cnn = new SqlConnection("Server=.\\sqlexpress;Database=northwind;Trusted_Connection=True;");
cnn.Open();
SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("update customers set city ='valXXX' where customerID= 'ALFKI'", cnn);
cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
cnn.Close();
childScope1.Complete();
}
parentTransactionClone1.Complete();
}, TaskCreationOptions.AttachedToParent);
var childTask2 = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
using (TransactionScope childScope2 = new TransactionScope(parentTransactionClone2))
{
SqlConnection cnn = new SqlConnection("Server=.\\sqlexpress;Database=northwind;Trusted_Connection=True;");
cnn.Open();
SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("update customers2 set city ='valyyy' where customerID= 'ANATR'", cnn);
cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
cnn.Close();
childScope2.Complete();
}
parentTransactionClone2.Complete();
}, TaskCreationOptions.AttachedToParent);
});
parentTask.Wait();
mainTransaction.Complete();
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// manage ex
}
public static TransactionScope CreateTransactionScope()
{
var transactionOptions = new TransactionOptions();
transactionOptions.IsolationLevel = IsolationLevel.ReadCommitted;
transactionOptions.Timeout = TransactionManager.MaximumTimeout;
return new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required, transactionOptions);
}
The TransactionScope class sets the ambient transaction for the current thread (see also Transaction.Current only.
You should at least assume that each task runs in a separate thread (although that is not a necessity with the TPL).
Review the "important" box in the remarks section of the relevant article - if you want to share a transaction between threads, you need to use the DependentTransaction class.
Personally, I am sure that the whole facility to share a transaction amongst multiple threads works technically, however, I have always found it easier to write up a design that uses a seperate transaction per thread.
Task Parallel Library cannot figure out on its own the details of the task, and it won't be rolling back automatically, the closest you can do is from the parent task you define another task child1-rollback that gets executed only if child1 fails, and you can define this very nicely by specifying a TaskContinuationOption set to OnlyOnFailure so the task will execute only if child1 fails, same can be said about child2.

Categories

Resources