distributed-transactions

Context is: producer (JTA transaction PT ) is both sending message to JMS queue and making DB update; consumer (JTA transaction CT ) listens on same queue and reads DB when message is received; application server - WebLogic, DB - Oracle. I've observed, that sometimes CT is not (yet?) able to see DB changes of PT , event if corresponding JMS message is already received ( PT is committed?). It seems that JTA can't guarantee consistency of such kind (this was also confirmed in Jurgen Holler's presentation "Transaction Choices for Performance" ). What is the best way to avoid such problem (except

We decided to use a micro-orm against an Azure Database. As our business only needs "inserts" and "selects", we decided to suppress all code-managed SqlTransaction (no concurrency issues on data). Then, we noticed that our instance of Azure Database responded very slowly. The " rpc completed " event occured in delays that are hundreds times the time needed to run a simple sql statement. Next, we benchmarked our code with EF6 and we saw that the server responded very quickly. As EF6 implements a built-in transaction, we decided to restore the SqlTransaction (ReadCommited) on the micro-orm and

We are having an issue when using NHibernate with distributed transactions. Consider the following snippet: // // There is already an ambient distributed transaction // using(var scope = new TransactionScope()) { using(var session = _sessionFactory.OpenSession()) using(session.BeginTransaction()) { using(var cmd = new SqlCommand(_simpleUpdateQuery, (SqlConnection)session.Connection)) { cmd.ExecuteNonQuery(); } session.Save(new SomeEntity()); session.Transaction.Commit(); } scope.Complete(); } Sometimes, when the server is under extreme load, we'll see the following: The query executed with cmd

Using the TransactionScope object to set up an implicit transaction that doesn't need to be passed across function calls is great! However, if a connection is opened whilst another is already open, the transaction coordinator silently escalates the transaction to be distributed (needing MSDTC service to be running and taking up much more resources and time). So, this is fine: using (var ts = new TransactionScope()) { using (var c = DatabaseManager.GetOpenConnection()) { // Do Work } using (var c = DatabaseManager.GetOpenConnection()) { // Do more work in same transaction using different

I am fairly new to entity framework and I have a doubt on EF's db.SaveChange. From some posts and MSDN I learned that db.SaveChange by default does all the changes in transaction. Also there is a way we can create a transaction of our own using db.Database.BeginTransaction() ,"db" being my context class object. So I have two questions: What to use & when If I am inserting data to one table whose @@identity is foreign key to my next inserting table, rather than using db.SaveChange() to get the @@identity is there any other way ( db.SaveChanges() is in a user defined transaction scope) and will