transactionscope

I have two transaction scopes, one within another. I would love to know if the inner transaction scope will be rolled back after it has been committed and the outer one does not complete. Since they are nested, the inner transaction will roll back. This is not the whole story, and depends on how you create the nested transaction, but by default, it will roll back. This article goes into depth about TransactionScope and should answer most of your questions. Being distributed or not is irrelevant. It depends on the scope option you start the nested transaction scope with. If you use the default

I'm calling a stored procedure in Entity Framework 6 that can create Databases and tables if necessary. It is throwing the error; Message "CREATE DATABASE statement not allowed within multi-statement transaction.\r\nALTER DATABASE statement not allowed within multi-statement transaction.\r\nDatabase 'CoreSnapshotJS3' does not exist. Make sure that the name is entered correctly." string I do not want it in a transaction, and have used this to supress the transaction using (var transation = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Suppress)) { return ((IObjectContextAdapter)this)

I have a parent object (part of a DAL) that contains, amongst other things, a collection ( List<t> ) of child objects. When I'm saving the object back to the DB, I enter/update the parent, and then loop through each child. For maintainability, I've put all the code for the child into a separate private method. I was going to use standard ADO Transactions, but on my travels, I stumbled across the TransactionScope object, which I believe will enable me to wrap all DB interaction in the parent method (along with all interaction in the child method) in one transaction. So far so good..? So the

I am using transactions in my unit tests to roll back changes. The unit test uses a dbcontext, and the service i'm testing uses his own. Both of them are wrapped in one transaction, and one dbcontext is in the block of the other. The thing is, when the inner dbcontext saves his changes, it's not visible to the outer dbcontext (and i don't think it's because the other dbcontext might already have the object loaded). Here is the example: [TestMethod] public void EditDepartmentTest() { using (TransactionScope transaction = new TransactionScope()) { using (MyDbContext db = new MyDbContext()) { /

I have "inherited" a little C# method that creates an ADO.NET SqlCommand object and loops over a list of items to be saved to the database (SQL Server 2005). Right now, the traditional SqlConnection/SqlCommand approach is used, and to make sure everything works, the two steps (delete old entries, then insert new ones) are wrapped into an ADO.NET SqlTransaction. using (SqlConnection _con = new SqlConnection(_connectionString)) { using (SqlTransaction _tran = _con.BeginTransaction()) { try { SqlCommand _deleteOld = new SqlCommand(......., _con); _deleteOld.Transaction = _tran; _deleteOld

This question already has an answer here: How to write a transaction to cover Moving a file and Inserting record in database? 4 answers I've been using TransactionScope to work with the database and it feels nice. What I'm looking for is the following: using(var scope=new TransactionScope()) { // Do something with a few files... scope.Complete(); } but obviously this doesn't work -- if there are 20 files, and an exception occurs on the 9th file, all previous 8 remain changed and the rest unchanged -- no rollback is performed. So, what would be the best way to implement a scope-like behavior