Search Results

Search found 5295 results on 212 pages for 'transaction scope'.

Page 12/212 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • INSERT and transaction serialization in PostreSQL

    - by Alexander
    I have a question. Transaction isolation level is set to serializable. When the one user opens a transaction and INSERTs or UPDATEs data in "table1" and then another user opens a transaction and tries to INSERT data to the same table, does the second user need to wait 'til the first user commits the transaction?

    Read the article

  • MySQL: automatic rollback on transaction failure

    - by praksant
    Is there any way to set MySQL to rollback any transaction on first error/warning automatically? Now if everything goes well, it commits, but on failure it leaves transaction open and on another start of transaction it commits incomplete changes from failed transaction. (I'm executing queries from php, but i don't want to check in php for failure, as it would make more calls between mysql server and webserver.) Thank you

    Read the article

  • INSERT and transaction searilization in PostreSQL

    - by Alexander
    Hello! I have a question. Transaction isolation level set to serializable. When the one user open transaction and INSERT or UPDATE data in "table1" and then another user open transaction and try to INSERT data to the same table is second user need to wait 'til the first user commits the transaction?

    Read the article

  • MSDTC - Communication with the underlying transaction manager has failed (Firewall open, MSDTC network access on)

    - by SocialAddict
    I'm having problems with my ASP.NET web forms system. It worked on our test server but now we are putting it live one of the servers is within a DMZ and the SQL server is outside of that (on our network still though - although a different subnet) I have open up the firewall completely between these two boxes to see if that was the issue and it still gives the error message "Communication with the underlying transaction manager has failed" whenever we try and use the "TransactionScope". We can access the data for retrieval it's just transactions that break it. We have also used msdtc ping to test the connection and with the amendments on the firewall that pings successfully, but the same error occurs! How do i resolve this error? Any help would be great as we have a system to go live today. Panic :) Edit: I have created a more straightforward test page with a transaction as below and this works fine. Could a nested transaction cause this kind of error and if so why would this only cause an issue when using a live box in a dmz with a firewall? AuditRepository auditRepository = new AuditRepository(); try { using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope()) { auditRepository.Add(DateTime.Now, 1, "TEST-TRANSACTIONS#1", 1); auditRepository.Save(); auditRepository.Add(DateTime.Now, 1, "TEST-TRANSACTIONS#2", 1); auditRepository.Save(); scope.Complete(); } } catch (Exception ex) { Response.Write("Test Error For Transaction: " + ex.Message + "<br />" + ex.StackTrace); }

    Read the article

  • how to troubleshoot sql server issues

    - by joe
    i have an ASP .net application with sql server database, and i am wondering if you can give your ideas on how to troubleshoot the following issue: i can insert / update / delete from any table, but i have one page that uses transactions to insert into different tables. the c# code is correct and very simple, but it fails. i used the sql profiler to see how my app interacts with the DB, especially that the app is using stored procedures, i can catch the exec procedure statement and run it manually from SSMS and it works fine, but the same stored procedure fails from the application!!! which lead me to think that issue is coming from the user account and settings, i am no expert in sql server and wondering if anyone can explain how to verify the required settings for user account. thanks EDIT: in web.config here is how i reference my connection <connectionStrings> <add name="Conn" connectionString="Data Source=localhost;Initial Catalog=myDB;Persist Security Info=True;User ID=DbUser;Password=password1254_3" providerName="System.Data.SqlClient"> </connectionstring> EDIT: i will try to describe the process here: 1- i begin a transaction 2- i call a stored proc to insert (which succeeds) and return the scope identity ( that will be used in the next step) 3- i call another stored procedure to insert some more info + scope identity from step 2, which is a foreign key here 4- i get error, foreign key violation 5- transaction rolled back, now tables empty again... thanks

    Read the article

  • NHibernate Session per Call in WCF - How to Rollback

    - by Corey Coogan
    I've implemented some components to use WCF with both an IoC Container (StructureMap) and the Session per Call pattern. The NHibernate stuff is most taken from here: http://realfiction.net/Content/Entry/133. It seems to be OK, but I want to open a transaction with each call and commit at the end, rather than just Flush() which how its being done in the article. Here's where I am running into some problems and could use some advice. I haven't figured out a good way to rollback. I realize I can check the CommunicationState and if there's an exception, rollback, like so: public void Detach(InstanceContext owner) { if (Session != null) { try { if(owner.State == CommunicationState.Faulted) RollbackTransaction(); else CommitTransaction(); } finally { Session.Dispose(); } } } void CommitTransaction() { if(Session.Transaction != null && Session.Transaction.IsActive) Session.Transaction.Commit(); } void RollbackTransaction() { if (Session.Transaction != null && Session.Transaction.IsActive) Session.Transaction.Rollback(); } However, I almost never return a faulted state from a service call. I would typically handle the exception and return an appropriate indicator on my response object and rollback the transaction myself. The only way I can think of handling this would be to inject not only repositories into my WCF services, but also an ISession so I can rollback and handle the way I want. That doesn't sit well with me and seems kind of leaky. Anyone else handling the same problem?

    Read the article

  • Validate HAML from ActiveRecord: scope/controller/helpers for link_to etc?

    - by Chris Boyle
    I like HAML. So much, in fact, that in my first Rails app, which is the usual blog/CMS thing, I want to render the body of my Page model using HAML. So here is app/views/pages/_body.html.haml: .entry-content= Haml::Engine.new(body, :format => :html5).render ...and it works (yay, recursion). What I'd like to do is validate the HAML in the body when creating or updating a Page. I can almost do that, but I'm stuck on the scope argument to render. I have this in app/models/page.rb: validates_each :body do |record, attr, value| begin Haml::Engine.new(value, :format => :html5).render(record) rescue Exception => e record.errors.add attr, "line #{(e.respond_to? :line) && e.line || 'unknown'}: #{e.message}" end end You can see I'm passing record, which is a Page, but even that doesn't have a controller, and in particular doesn't have any helpers like link_to, so as soon as a Page uses any of that it's going to fail to validate even when it would actually render just fine. So I guess I need a controller as scope for this, but accessing that from here in the model (where the validator is) is a big MVC no-no, and as such I don't think Rails gives me a way to do it. (I mean, I suppose I could stash a controller in some singleton somewhere or something, but... excuse me while I throw up.) What's the least ugly way to properly validate HAML in an ActiveRecord validator?

    Read the article

  • How can I have 2 ADO access methods use the same Transaction?

    - by KevinDeus
    I'm writing a test to see if my LINQ to Entity statement works.. I'll be using this for others if I can get this concept going.. my intention here is to INSERT a record with ADO, then verify it can be queried with LINQ, and then ROLLBACK the whole thing at the end. I'm using ADO to insert because I don't want to use the object or the entity model that I am testing. I figure that a plain ADO INSERT should do fine. problem is.. they both use different types of connections. is it possible to have these 2 different data access methods use the same TRANSACTION so I can roll it back?? _conn = new SqlConnection(_connectionString); _conn.Open(); _trans = _conn.BeginTransaction(); var x = new SqlCommand("INSERT INTO Table1(ID, LastName, FirstName, DateOfBirth) values('127', 'test2', 'user', '2-12-1939');", _conn); x.ExecuteNonQuery(); //So far, so good. Adding a record to the table. //at this point, we need to do **_trans.Commit()** here because our Entity code can't use the same connection. Then I have to manually delete in the TestHarness.TearDown.. I'd like to eliminate this step //(this code is in another object, I'll include it for brevity. Imagine that I passed the connection in) //check to see if it is there using (var ctx = new XEntities(_conn)) //can't do this.. _conn is not an EntityConnection! { var retVal = (from m in ctx.Table1 where m.first_name == "test2" where m.last_name == "user" where m.Date_of_Birth == "2-12-1939" where m.ID == 127 select m).FirstOrDefault(); return (retVal != null); } //Do test.. Assert.BlahBlah(); _trans.Rollback();

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to run an ng-switch directly on a select > option

    - by Asok
    Has anyone been able to run an ng-switch on a <select> -> <option> tag, like so?: <select ng-model="form.permitLocality" ng-switch on="localityTypeRadio"> <option ng-switch-when="County" ng-repeat="county in countyList"> {{ county.name }} </option> <option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList"> {{ city.name }} </option> <option ng-switch-when="Town" ng-repeat="town in townList"> {{ town.name }} </option> </select> I am not getting any errors or any options (all values verified), I just thought it would save me a couple lines and thought I'd try it. Here is my selector, in case you're curious (value verified): <label class="radio inline"> <input type="radio" name="localityTypeRadio" ng-model="localityTypeRadio" value="County"> County </label> <label class="radio inline"> <input type="radio" name="localityTypeRadio" ng-model="localityTypeRadio" value="City"> City </label> <label class="radio inline"> <input type="radio" name="localityTypeRadio" ng-model="localityTypeRadio" value="Town"> Town </label> This is not a big deal, just didn't know if this was a limitation / not recommended with an ng-switch EDIT I was mistaken when I initially said that nothing was happening (browser caching), there appears to be the correct number of options but the source code shows nothing but white space: <select ng-model="form.permitLocality" class="input-block-level ng-pristine ng-valid" ng-switch="" on="localityTypeRadio" ng-hide="form.permitLocality.length"><option value="? string: ?"></option> <!-- ngRepeat: county in countyList --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: County --> <!-- ngRepeat: city in cityList --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option><!-- ngSwitchWhen: City --><option ng-switch-when="City" ng-repeat="city in cityList" class="ng-scope ng-binding" value=" "> </option> <!-- ngRepeat: town in townList --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --><!-- ngSwitchWhen: Town --> </select>

    Read the article

  • Backing Up Transaction Logs to Tape?

    - by David Stein
    I'm about to put my database in Full Recovery Model and start taking transaction log backups. I am taking a full nightly backup to another server and later in the evening this file and many others are backed up to tape. My question is this. I will take hourly (or more if necessary) t-log backups and store them on the other server as well. However, if my full backups are passing DBCC and integrity checks, do I need to put my T-Logs on tape? If someone wants point in time recovery to yesterday at 2pm, I would need the previous full backup and the transaction logs. However, other than that case, if I know my full back ups are good, is there value in keeping the previous day's transaction log backups?

    Read the article

  • Under what circumstances is an SqlConnection automatically enlisted in an ambient TransactionScope T

    - by Triynko
    What does it mean for an SqlConnection to be "enlisted" in a transaction? Does it simply mean that commands I execute on the connection will participate in the transaction? If so, under what circumstances is an SqlConnection automatically enlisted in an ambient TransactionScope Transaction? See questions in code comments. My guess to each question's answer follows each question in parenthesis. Scenario 1: Opening connections INSIDE a transaction scope using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope()) using (SqlConnection conn = ConnectToDB()) { // Q1: Is connection automatically enlisted in transaction? (Yes?) // // Q2: If I open (and run commands on) a second connection now, // with an identical connection string, // what, if any, is the relationship of this second connection to the first? // // Q3: Will this second connection's automatic enlistment // in the current transaction scope cause the transaction to be // escalated to a distributed transaction? (Yes?) } Scenario 2: Using connections INSIDE a transaction scope that were opened OUTSIDE of it //Assume no ambient transaction active now SqlConnection new_or_existing_connection = ConnectToDB(); //or passed in as method parameter using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope()) { // Connection was opened before transaction scope was created // Q4: If I start executing commands on the connection now, // will it automatically become enlisted in the current transaction scope? (No?) // // Q5: If not enlisted, will commands I execute on the connection now // participate in the ambient transaction? (No?) // // Q6: If commands on this connection are // not participating in the current transaction, will they be committed // even if rollback the current transaction scope? (Yes?) // // If my thoughts are correct, all of the above is disturbing, // because it would look like I'm executing commands // in a transaction scope, when in fact I'm not at all, // until I do the following... // // Now enlisting existing connection in current transaction conn.EnlistTransaction( Transaction.Current ); // // Q7: Does the above method explicitly enlist the pre-existing connection // in the current ambient transaction, so that commands I // execute on the connection now participate in the // ambient transaction? (Yes?) // // Q8: If the existing connection was already enlisted in a transaction // when I called the above method, what would happen? Might an error be thrown? (Probably?) // // Q9: If the existing connection was already enlisted in a transaction // and I did NOT call the above method to enlist it, would any commands // I execute on it participate in it's existing transaction rather than // the current transaction scope. (Yes?) }

    Read the article

  • Can I ask Postgresql to ignore errors within a transaction

    - by fmark
    I use Postgresql with the PostGIS extensions for ad-hoc spatial analysis. I generally construct and issue SQL queries by hand from within psql. I always wrap an analysis session within a transaction, so if I issue a destructive query I can roll it back. However, when I issue a query that contains an error, it cancels the transaction. Any further queries elicit the following warning: ERROR: current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of transaction block Is there a way I can turn this behaviour off? It is tiresome to rollback the transaction and rerun previous queries every time I make a typo.

    Read the article

  • Transaction & Locks Problem

    - by jay
    with in do transaction, i defined a label and in this label i am accessing a table with exclusive-lock.and at the end of label i have done all the changes in that table. bt now i am with in transaction block. Now, i tried to access that same table in another session.then it show an error, Table used by another user. So is it possible that, can we release teh table with in transaction,so another user can access it. Exe Session1) DO TRANSACTION: loopb: repeat: -- --------------------- control is here right now. end. /repeat/ -- end /do transaction/ Session2) I tried to access same table,bt it show an error,that table locked by another user.

    Read the article

  • Transaction & Locks Problem

    - by jay
    with in do transaction, i defined a label and in this label i am accessing a table with exclusive-lock.and at the end of label i have done all the changes in that table. bt now i am with in transaction block. Now, i tried to access that same table in another session.then it show an error, Table used by another user. So is it possible that, can we release teh table with in transaction,so another user can access it. Exe Session1) DO TRANSACTION: loopb: repeat: -- --------------------- control is here right now. end. /repeat/ -- end /do transaction/ Session2) I tried to access same table,bt it show an error,that table locked by another user.

    Read the article

  • Direct web URL to PayPal transaction

    - by tags2k
    Having implemented PayPal's Website Payments Standard, I'd like to link to the details view of a transaction from my site's back end - just a simple direct web URL to the PayPal side. I don't know why this is tricky but when I try to get it from being logged in to the PayPal system it seems very obfuscated, in this form: history.paypal.com/uk/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_history-details&info=[looks like some kind of GUID]&ptype=4&history_cache=[huge encoded string] I'm guessing it's by design but it's not very helpful if you want a quick way to jump to a transaction's details. I've tried the https://www.paypal.com/vst/id=1234 form (also with co.uk as I am UK-based) recommended on a few sites I saw in my search, but I am told that: The transaction ID in your link is invalid. This happens even when copying the transaction ID directly from PayPal's back-end order listing. Is there a reliable way to directly link to an order / transaction details page in PayPal?

    Read the article

  • angularjs model view update through angular directive

    - by Relicset
    I am trying to update my view using model in angular directive here is the directive I have created app.directive('aboutOptions', [function() { return { restrict: 'C', scope: { testing: '=' }, transclude: true, link: function(scope, elem, attr) { scope.$watch(attr.ngModel, function() { console.log(scope.$eval(attr.ngModel)); scope.testing = scope.$eval(attr.ngModel); }); } } }]); here is html model and file name is ab.html <input type="text" class="about-options" ng-model="testing" /> Here is the view to be updated and file name is show.html <h2 class="about-options">{{testing}}</h2> ab.html file will be loaded as a template inside jquery ui dialog and my show.html file is in main page If I remove scope: { testing: '=' }, Console is showing what I am typing Update - 1 Tried with the following changes testing: '=test' And in html <input type="text" class="about-options" ng-model="testing" /> <h2 class="about-options">{{test}}</h2>

    Read the article

  • With NHibernate and Transaction do I rollback on commit failure or does it auto rollback on single c

    - by mattcodes
    I've built the following Dispose method for my Unit Of Work which essentially wraps the active NH session & transaction (transaction set as variable after opening session as to not be replaced if NH session gets new transaction after error) public void Dispose() { Func<ITransaction,bool> transactionStateOkayFunc = trans => trans != null && trans.IsActive && !trans.WasRolledBack; try { if(transactionStateOkayFunc(this.transaction)) { if (HasErrored) { transaction.Rollback(); } else { try { transaction.Commit(); } catch (Exception) { if(transactionStateOkayFunc(transaction)) transaction.Rollback(); throw; } } } } finally { if(transaction != null) transaction.Dispose(); if(session.IsOpen) session.Close(); } I can't help feeling that code is a little bloated, will a transaction automatically rollback is a discrete Commit fails in the case of non-nested transactions? Will Commit or Rollback automatically Dipose the transaction? If not will Session.Close() automatically dispose the associated transaction?

    Read the article

  • Why does it matter that in Javascript, scope is function-level, not block-level?

    - by Jian Lin
    In the question http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1451009/javascript-infamous-loop-problem the accepted answer from Christoph's says that JavaScript's scopes are function-level, not block-level What if Javascript's scopes are block-level, then would the Infamous Loop problem still occur? But will there be a different (or easier way) to fix it? Is it as opposed to other languages, where using a { would start a new scope?

    Read the article

  • Can .NET Task instances go out of scope during run?

    - by Henry Jackson
    If I have the following block of code in a method (using .NET 4 and the Task Parallel Library): var task = new Task(() => DoSomethingLongRunning()); task.Start(); and the method returns, will that task go out of scope and be garbage collected, or will it run to completion? I haven't noticed any issues with GCing, but want to make sure I'm not setting myself up for a race condition with the GC.

    Read the article

  • Geek City: What gets logged for index rebuild operations?

    - by Kalen Delaney
    This blog post was inspired by a question from a future student. Someone who was already booked for my SQL Server Internals class in June asked for some information on a current problem he was having with transaction log writes causing excessive wait times during index rebuild operations when run in ONLINE mode. He wanted to know if switching to BULK_LOGGED recovery could help. I knew the difference between ALTER INDEX in FULL vs BULK_LOGGED recovery when doing normal OFFLINE rebuilds, but I wasn't...(read more)

    Read the article

  • JDBC transaction dead-lock solution required?

    - by user49767
    It's a scenario described my friend and challenged to find solution. He is using Oracle database and JDBC connection with read committed as transaction isolation level. In one of the transaction, he updates a record and executes selects statement and commits the transaction. when everything happening within single thread, things are fine. But when multiple requests are handled, dead-lock happens. Thread-A updates a record. Thread B updates another record. Thread-A issues select statement and waits for Thread-B's transaction to complete the commit operation. Thread-B issues select statement and waits for Thread-A's transaction to complete the commit operation. Now above causes dead-lock. Since they use command pattern, the base framework allows to issue commit only once (at the end of all the db operation), so they are unable to issue commit immediately after select statement. My argument was Thread-A supposed to select all the records which are committed and hence should not be issue. But he said that Thread-A will surely wait till Thread-B commits the record. is that true? What are all the ways, to avoid the above issue? is it possible to change isolation-level? (without changing underlying java framework) Little information about base framework, it is something similar to Struts action, their each and every request handled by one action, transaction begins before execution and commits after execution.

    Read the article

  • Common Properties: Consolidating Loan, Purchase, Inventory and Sale tables into one Transaction tabl

    - by Frank Computer
    Pawnshop Application: I have separate tables for Loan, Purchase, Inventory & Sales transactions. Each tables rows are joined to their respective customer rows by: customer.pk [serial] = loan.fk [integer]; = purchase.fk [integer]; = inventory.fk [integer]; = sale.fk [integer]; Since there are so many common properties within the four tables, I consolidated the four tables into one table called "transaction", where a column: transaction.trx_type char(1) {L=Loan, P=Purchase, I=Inventory, S=Sale} Scenario: A customer initially pawns merchandise, makes a couple of interest payments, then decides he wants to sell the merchandise to the pawnshop, who then places merchandise in Inventory and eventually sells it to another customer. I designed a generic transaction table where for example: transaction.main_amount DECIMAL(7,2) in a loan transaction holds the pawn amount, in a purchase holds the purchase price, in inventory and sale holds sale price. This is clearly a denormalized design, but has made programming alot easier and improved performance. Any type of transaction can now be performed from within one screen, without the need to change to different tables.

    Read the article

  • BizTalk 2009 - The Scope of the Table Looping Functoid

    - by StuartBrierley
    When mapping in BizTalk you will find there are times when you need to map from flat and dispersed elemements in your source schema to a repeated record with child elements in your destination schema.  Below is an example of how you can make use of the Table Looping Functoid to bring together these flat elements and create your repeated group.  Although this example is purposely simple, I have previsouly encounted this issue on a much more complex scale when mapping the response from a credit scoring agency where all the applicant details were supplied in separate parts of a very flat schema. Consider the source and destination schemas as follows:   Although the Table Looping Functoid states that the first input must be a scoping element linked from a repeating group, you can actually also make use of a constant value.  In this case I know that the source schema always contains two people, so I set this to two. Then you need to set the number of columns in your table, in this case 2 (name and sex) and link all the required fields from the source schema. Following this you can configure the table. You can then add the Table Extractor functoids and complete the map. If you now validate this map you will see that BizTalk will warn you about the scoping link for the Table Looping Functoid, but this can be safely ignored. C:\Code\Developer Folders\Stuart Brierley\Test Mapping\TableLooping.btm: warning btm1071: A first input of the Table-Looping functoid must be a link from a Source Tree Node which acts as the scoping parameter. Testing the map will produce the following output:

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >