My first question: Can there be a performance loss if I uncomment the lines about transaction usage? I mean, when I do this I start to get more timeouts.
My problem goes on. When I comment those lines and run a stress tool, I am getting "column X does not belong to table Y" errors. If those lines are not commented i am not getting this error, but I get timeout errors frequently. So, my second question: is there something wrong in my query or is there a bad coding practice I am following? Could someone offer a better and more robust sample for this code block?
By the way, connection pooling is on. And these errors are observed under high loads.
Hi there, I have decided to move all my transaction handling from asp.net to stored procedures in a SQL Server 2000 database. I know the database is capable of rolling back the transactions just like myTransaction.Rollback() in asp.net. But what about exceptions? In asp.net, I am used to doing the following: <code>Try 'execute commands myTransaction.Commit()Catch ex As Exception Response.Write(ex.Message) myTransaction.Rollback()End Try</code>Will the database inform me of any exceptions (and their messages)? Do I need to put anything explicit in my stored procedure other than rollback transaction? Any help is greatly appreciated
Hi All, Can anybody suggest me a website where I can find articles on Managing transactions with Sql server. Also a scenario where the transactions take place in a environment involving 2 different databases, Like the bank account and credit card transactions (specifically of 2 way kind) Thanks
I have a web application with a shopping cart, how do I stop all the shopping cart transaction from going into the db log? Is this possible? These are are only transient data movements, and will never be need to to restore to, and they are cause log bloat. Or is there a better way to stop log bloat?
How can we change connection properties in a DTS pkg with connection? You can loop through the connection count but the connection ID is not static one.So can’t rely on that. Is there another way of changing connection properties?
I am currently designing a DTS Package to import data that is processed daily into a large database.
I have to design the package such that if any step fails when importing, I roll back the entire transaction.
I have designed the package with this in mind, checked "join transaction if present" and "rollback transaction on failure" in all of the workflows. I have also made all workflows serialized.
However, when I run the package, it fails on one of the data pumps with the error:
I am replicating (finally!!) and on my publishers agent history I can see it says xx transactions with xx commands were delivered. (xx being the number) Where can I look to see what the transactions or commands are?
Is there a place the system stores this information?
Is there a point to wrapping a single UPDATE or INSERT statement in an explicit TRANSACTION:
BEGIN TRANSACTION
INSERT INTO Table (...) VALUES (...)
COMMIT TRANSACTION
I understand ACID and concept of transactions. However, I thought they were only necessary for multi-statement operations. I'm maintaining code that does this and am wondering if this is necessary. Does SQL Server guarantee ACID for single statements? Are single UPDATE/INSERT statements prone to race condition like affects without using explicit transactions?
If you run the Begin Transaction code and then run a create such as an update query and you see that it effects the number of rows that you wanted it to effect is there a way to look at the actual data that changed before you Commit Transaction?
I have a table with around 240 columns and one of the column in the Table is the Inserttime ( DATETIME ) and I using a GETDATE() function in the stored Proc, when we insert data into the table. In the same Milli second 2007-06-27 09:32:58.303 , I have around 7600 records in the database. The Stored Proc is called for each Individual record and we don't bunch the transactions. Is this possible.
I did some bench marking on this server and I can insert only 700 - 800 records approx / sec on this particular table.
I have a small database that I have been testing.I get an error about a transaction deadlock.The code is in stored procedures and I added transactions to the sp'sbut the error happened again.I wrapped the whole sp in just one transaction and I don't have anyindex on the tables.When I test just by running a program that sends 3 calls at a time itwill get a deadlocked transaction as I send 6 or 9 at a time.I am not sure how it can have a deadlocked transaction after I usedtransactions(begin and commit) in the sp's.Steve
I am working with transactions and use try catch to capture errors and in the event of an error i have to rollback the transaction. How can i perform this?, most of the errors which i forsee are either insertion of null values into non nullable columns or violation of Primary keys while inserting duplicates. I started by coding the following way but it does not rollaback apparently the try catch does not work for above kind of errors..Can somebody help..
DECLARE @REPORTING_PERIOD VARCHAR(6)
BEGIN TRY
BEGIN TRANSACTION
-- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
-- interfering with SELECT statements.
SET NOCOUNT ON;
SET @REPORTING_PERIOD =(Select REPORT_PERIOD_ID from dbo.T_REPORT_PERIOD where C_FLAG_ACTIVITY=1)
--Step 1
INSERT INTO [dbo].[T_COUNTRIES]
([C_COUNTRY]
,[LB_COUNTRY]
,[C_REGION]
,[FK_REPORTING_PERIOD])
SELECT [C_COUNTRY]
,[LB_COUNTRY]
,[C_REGION]
,@REPORTING_PERIOD
FROM [dbo].[IN_T_COUNTRIES]
--Step 2
INSERT INTO [dbo].[T_FLE]
([FK_P_FLE]
,[C_COSMOS]
,[LB_FLE]
,[C_PARETO]
,[C_OPCO_SCOPE]
,[C_LEVEL]
,[C_FLE_TYPE]
,[C_ACTIVITY]
,[F_MATERIAL]
,[C_MATERIAL_PRIORITY]
,[C_CALCULATION_METHOD]
,[F_CREDIT_RISK_MATERIALITY]
,[V_PARTICIPATION]
,[FK_REPORTING_PERIOD])
SELECT Null as [FK_P_FLE]
,[C_COSMOS]
,[LB_FLE]
,[C_PARETO]
,[C_OPCO_SCOPE]
,[C_LEVEL]
,[C_FLE_TYPE]
,@REPORTING_PERIOD
FROM [dbo].[IN_T_FLE]
COMMIT TRANSACTION
END TRY
BEGIN CATCH
SELECT
ERROR_NUMBER() as ErrorNumber,
ERROR_LINE() as ErrorLine,
ERROR_MESSAGE() as ErrorMessage;
-- Test XACT_STATE for 1 or -1.
-- XACT_STATE = 0 means there is no transaction and
-- a commit or rollback operation would generate an error.
-- Test whether the transaction is uncommittable.
IF (XACT_STATE()) = -1
BEGIN
PRINT
N'The transaction is in an uncommittable state. ' +
'Rolling back transaction.'
ROLLBACK TRANSACTION;
END;
-- Test whether the transaction is active and valid.
I've been searching around and haven't found anything that simply states what I want to know.
I want to use a transaction within my CLR Stored Proc, to do so I've got System.Transactions referenced and I can access the current transaction via Transaction.Current.
My questions are
Will there always be a current transaction?
Do I need to create a new transaction if one doesn't already exist?
I need to push rows from CE to SQL Server 2000 and after delete these rows of CE database only if all rows have been sent to SQL Server 2000.
I think the best is work with transactions. Since I know I can use transactions for this purpose, can anybody give me a link with push transaction examples ?
What does "Transactions/sec" counter in SQL 2005 under databases do in terms of performance. My counter shows almost 100% all the time in 4 terrbyte DB in superdome with many CPUs.
I have transaction that will run on an hourly bases. I need to make sure that no one will start this transaction while it is running. I just need to know the system table that has all the transaction names in them and check to see if the transaction is running or not. what i am trying to do is not to have locks....just wanting to make sure that no one would run the same transaction twice. does anyone have any idea on how we can do this?
If you ask a .net developer he would likely say that he uses System.Transactions to manage transactions, a DBA on the other hand places transactions within the T-SQL of stored procedures.
What rules do architects and others, use when determining if the transactions should be placed in:
.net Middle Tier Components using System.Transactions for example.
T-SQL Stored Procedures.
Both .net Middle Tier Components and T-SQL Stored Procedures. Thanks in advance,
if i have a loop that runs through records in a dataset like thisfor(int i=0;i<ds.Tables[0].Rows.Count;++i) and in this loop i have several sql commands that run as a transaction in a try / catch block like : try{ // do stuff}catch{ trans.RollBack();}how can i keep the loop going even if a transaction failed. So the transaction works for each individual row. if row 100 fails for whatever i would like the loop to continue running, do i just simply remove the "throw" and it will continue looping ? my catch block currently looks like catch(Exception ex){transaction.Rollback();activity.Log("Transaction aborted, rolling back. Error Message: " + ex.Message + " Stack Trace: " + ex.StackTrace.ToString());throw; }thanks,mcm
I have a class that use a TransactionScope object for make make two operations into a database. The problem is that in a computer works well but in another I receive a error message: "MSDTC is not running in .SQLEXPRESS". I had watched the services in the computer and the "Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator" is running. Does somebody know what is happening? Thankyou and sorry for my English.
I am using ADO.Net for data access and was wondering if anyone knows a good resource for information of sql transactions? Also, do you know if the ForEach statement can be made in sql transactions?
hi all, i'm developing a WebApplication with VisualStudio2005 (with C# code).i've defined a DataSet with some TableAdatpter. For each TableAdapter, i've definet some "customized" commands, performing specialized operations over the table on DB. (db is SqlServer2000).For each TableAdapter, i've set as "public" the connection, so that i can use it within my code for beginning a new transaction. Now, how can i set that transaction, to the specialized commands I defined for each TableAdapter? Thanks all.Andrea.
Hi Guys, Im having trouble stopping a transaction once the result on one or more of my sql statements rolls back the transaction. Take a look at one my first 'IF' statement (below). If the parameter '@Return' is 'False' i want the transaction rolleback and all sql execution to stop. But my problem is the rest of the sql gets executed and i end up getting rubbish data. Im still new to transactions so i think im doing something really wrong. Please take a look at my sql and help me out in what ever way you think is best. thanks in advance. MattBEGIN TRY SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE BEGIN TRANSACTION; BEGIN DECLARE @Return BIT; SELECT @Return = (SELECT IsReturnable FROM INVENTORY WHERE InventoryID = 6) IF (@Return = 'False') ROLLBACK TRANSACTION; DECLARE @Already_In INT; SELECT @Already_In = (SELECT ReturnedBy FROM InventoryInUse WHERE (CheckOutNumber = 375)) IF (@Already_In IS NOT NULL) ROLLBACK TRANSACTION; DECLARE @Outstanding As INT; SELECT @Outstanding = (SELECT (QtyTaken - 40) AS Outstanding FROM InventoryInUse WHERE (CheckOutNumber = 375)); DECLARE @OutstandingReason As VARCHAR(200); DECLARE @Get_Person_ID INT; Select @Get_Person_ID = (SELECT PersonID From [User] WHERE Username = 'matthewsk'); IF (@Outstanding < 0) ROLLBACK TRANSACTION; ELSE IF (@Outstanding > 0)BEGIN IF (@OutstandingReason = '') SELECT @RollBack = @RollBack + 1; UPDATE InventoryInUse SET ReturnedBy = @Get_Person_ID, ReturnDate = GETDATE(), QtyReturned = 40, QtyOutstanding = @Outstanding, WriteOffReason = 'Testing This' WHERE (CheckOutNumber = 375); UPDATE Inventory SET TotalQty = TotalQty - @Outstanding, QuantityInUse = QuantityInUse - (40 + @Outstanding) WHERE InventoryID = 6; END;ELSE IF (@Outstanding = 0) BEGIN UPDATE InventoryInUse SET ReturnedBy = @Get_Person_ID, ReturnDate = GETDATE(), QtyReturned = 50 WHERE CheckOutNumber = 375; UPDATE Inventory SET QuantityInUse = QuantityInUse - 50 WHERE InventoryID = 6; END; COMMIT TRANSACTION; END;END TRY BEGIN CATCH IF (XACT_STATE()) = -1 BEGIN ROLLBACK TRANSACTION;
I am using SqlServer 2005 Express Edition. I have written a stored procedure that has a transaction to make sure that it rolls back in case of failure. Is there a way to test that the transaction works. I don't now how to cause an error that would cause the transaction to roll back and raise the error with the details of the exception. Thanks, laura
I have a form that calls three separate queries to insert its contents in my database. The first query runs once and returns an identity value back to the calling code. Using this ID, it runs a foreach() on the selected items of two listboxes; running multiple inserts for each.
I want to group all of those inserts into a transaction that will rollback if any insert fails. I'm familiar with doing this in a stored procedure, but since this is a case where I can't use a single sproc I'm not sure exactly how.
I've been stumbling through using a SqlTransaction object and handling it from my code, but I can't seem to find much information on doing this. Any examples of a multiple query transaction using the SqlTransaction object would be very helpful.
I´ve created a class to make some standard transaction development a little bit faster. The destructor seem to run, but something makes this object slow down the database, if SqlTransaction and/or SqlConnection isnt manualy handled with the method Commit(). Any ideas on how to handle the SqlTransaction and SqlConnection better?
public class DataTransaction { private bool blnError = false; private ArrayList arrErrorList = new ArrayList(); private SqlConnectionobjConnection = new SqlConnection(System.Configuration.ConfigurationSettings.AppSettings["ConnectionString"].ToString()); private SqlTransactionobjTransaction;
I am just starting to falmiliarize myself with SQL transactions... I just created an SQL transaction... The first statement gets a value, if the value equals "" then the second statement executes... So if the value <> "" Then the second statement wont execute... What would happen in this scenario if the .Rollback is triggered? Heres my code:
Try conSqlConnect.Open() objTransaction = conSqlConnect.BeginTransaction cmdSelect.Transaction = objTransaction cmdInsert.Transaction = objTransaction dtrdatareader = cmdSelect.ExecuteReader() While dtrdatareader.Read() varCheckNumber1 = dtrdatareader("Status") End While dtrdatareader.Close() If varCheckNumber1 = "" Then cmdInsert.ExecuteNonQuery() End If objTransaction.Commit Catch objTransaction.RollBack Return "00" Finally If conSQLConnect.State = ConnectionState.Open Then conSqlConnect.Close() End If End Try
Hi,I am currently having dificulties in finding a way to use transactions while using classes for table representation.Let me explain, i have two tables a Customers and a Movements one, so two tables = two classes. Each class supports Insert, Edit and Delete, so if this tables worked seperatly there would be no problem but in this case whenever i create a customer i must create a movement for that customer so the connection don't pass between classes and i cannot use transactions ;(Is there any brilliant way to use transactions any other way? Even between connections or getting a solution for my implementation?Best Regards,Luis Simões
I am a novice with SQL, and I am failing to understand an aspect of Transactions. The following is the code I have created, having referred to a handful of resources including MSDN documentation. public void CreateSection(Section section) { string sql = @"INSERT INTO sectiontable (nodeid, title) VALUES (@nodeid, @title) SELECT Scope_Identity() FROM sectiontable"; SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(this.connectionString); SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand(sql, connection); command.Parameters.AddWithValue("@nodeid", section.Node.Id); command.Parameters.AddWithValue("@title", section.Title); connection.Open(); SqlTransaction transaction = connection.BeginTransaction(); try { command.Transaction = transaction; object result = command.ExecuteScalar(); if (result == null) throw new DataException("Returned identity was invalid."); section.Id = Convert.ToInt32(result); transaction.Commit(); } catch (Exception exception) { string message = "Could not create section."; try { transaction.Rollback(); message += " Transaction was reversed."; } catch (SqlException booboo) { message += " An exception of type " + booboo.GetType(); message += " occurred while attempting to roll back the transaction."; } // Note: DataAccessException below is a custom class. throw new DataAccessException(message, exception); } finally { connection.Close(); } } What seems clumsy is that we must have connection.Open() outside the try-catch block. The following cannot work, because the compiler notes the "Use of unassigned local variable 'transaction'" at the location shown below: SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(this.connectionString); SqlTransaction transaction; try { connection.Open(); transaction = connection.BeginTransaction(); // commands execute transaction.Commit(); } catch (Exception exception) { transaction.Rollback(); // <-- Compiler notes use of unassigned variable. // (First testing the variable does not help.) // handle exception. } finally { connection.Close(); } The following also does not work, as the BeginTransaction() method must be called against an open connection. SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(this.connectionString); SqlTransaction transaction = connection.BeginTransaction(); try { connection.Open(); // commands execute transaction.Commit(); } catch (Exception exception) { transaction.Rollback(); // handle exception. } finally { connection.Close(); } So, in MSDN documentation, the connection.Open() method is called outside the try-catch block (as shown in my full code). Yet, that same documentation notes that this method can lead to two types of exceptions. So it seems that the use of transactions forces an exception-throwing method to be used outside of a try-catch block. My question, then: is this unavoidable?
