Skip to main content

Entity Framework (EF) TransactionScope vs Database.BeginTransaction

In today blog post we will talk a little about a new feature that is available on EF6+ related to Transactions.
Until now, when we had to use transaction we used ‘TransactionScope’. It works great and I would say that is something that is now in our blood.
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required)) 
            { 
                using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("...")) 
                { 
                    conn.Open(); 
                    SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand(); 
                    sqlCommand.Connection = conn; 
                    sqlCommand.CommandText = ...
                    sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery(); 
 
                    ...
                }  
                scope.Complete(); 
            }
Starting with EF6.0 we have a new way to work with transactions. The new approach is based on Database.BeginTransaction(), Database.Rollback(), Database.Commit(). Yes, no more TransactionScope.
In the following example we create a new transaction and use it to commit our changes.
using (var dbContextTransaction = context.Database.BeginTransaction()) 
                { 
                    try 
                    { 
                        context.Foo.Add(foo);
                        context.Foo.Add(foo);
                        context.SaveChanges();
                        dbContextTransaction.Commit(); 
                    } 
                    catch (Exception) 
                    { 
                        dbContextTransaction.Rollback(); 
                    } 
                } 
The new feature allow us to pass an existing transaction between different context and even reuse an existing transaction using Database.UseTransaction().
using (var context = new FooContext(conn, contextOwnsConnection: false)) 
                        { 
                           context.Database.UseTransaction(myTransaction); 
         context.Foo.Add(foo);
                           context.SaveChanges(); 
                        } 
 
                        myTransaction.Commit(); 
The next tables shows what are the features supported by the new way to execute transaction in comparison with the old one.
Property
Database.BeginTransaction
(new feature)
TransactionScope
(old feature)
Is recommended by Microsoft in EF6
Yes
No
Only database related operation in transaction
Yes
No
Mixing DB operation and C# code in the transaction
No
Yes
Wrap Database.ExecuteSqlCommand in transaction if no transaction is specified
Yes
No
Can specify to a new DataContext an existing transaction that will be used
Yes
No
Can be database connection managed manually and specified to objects
Yes (to DataContext)
Partially Yes
Can the isolation level to be controlled
Yes
Yes
Can execute pure SQL queries in a custom transaction
Yes
Yes
Async calls supported in a transaction
Yes
Yes (from .NET 4.5.1, with some small limitation)
Where the transaction is managed and controlled
By developer from code
In background, by the .NET Core
Full control of the transaction
Yes
Partially
Existing transaction can be used
Yes
No

There is limitation related to retry policy. When we are doing multiple SaveChanges to our contexts, the retry policy would not know what data was saved or not. See below example:
using (var db = new FooContext()) 
{ 
    using (var transaction = db.Database.BeginTransaction()) 
    { 
        db.Foos.Add(new Foo()); 
        db.SaveChanges(); 
 
        db.Foos.Add(new Foo()); 
        db.SaveChanges(); 
 
        transaction.Commit(); 
    } 
}
In this case we have a workaround by suspending the retry execution strategy for that peace of code or specify a manual call execution strategy. I highly recommend to review this situations and try to create a store procedure that execute all the necessary changes in one transaction. It is safer and can be controlled easier.
The new way of using transactions is the one that is recommended by EF Team. This is the way how we should use transactions.

Comments

  1. Thanks for your article, it's really clear and helpful.

    ReplyDelete
  2. How can I, if I need to log the error like the ERROR_MESSAGE and ERROR_LINE in SQL SERVER in the catch method where the rollback is being performed?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great insightful article. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  4. why not use
    try
    {
    transaction.Commit();
    }catch(Exceptions)
    {
    transaction.Rollback();
    }

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to check in AngularJS if a service was register or not

There are cases when you need to check in a service or a controller was register in AngularJS.
For example a valid use case is when you have the same implementation running on multiple application. In this case, you may want to intercept the HTTP provider and add a custom step there. This step don’t needs to run on all the application, only in the one where the service exist and register.
A solution for this case would be to have a flag in the configuration that specify this. In the core you would have an IF that would check the value of this flag.
Another solution is to check if a specific service was register in AngularJS or not. If the service was register that you would execute your own logic.
To check if a service was register or not in AngularJS container you need to call the ‘has’ method of ‘inhector’. It will return TRUE if the service was register.
if ($injector.has('httpInterceptorService')) { $httpProvider.interceptors.push('httpInterceptorService&#…

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine:
threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration:

TeamCity.NET 4.51EF 6.0.2VS2013
It seems that there …

[Post-Event] Codecamp Conference Cluj-Napoca - Nov 19, 2016

Last day I was invited to another Codecamp Conference, that took place in Cluj-Napoca. Like other Codecamp Conferences, the event was very big, with more than 1.000 participants and 70 sessions. There were 10 tracks in parallel, so it was pretty hard to decide at  what session you want to join.
It was great to join this conference and I hope that you discovered something new during the conference.
At this event I talked about Azure IoT Hub and how we can use it to connect devices from the field. I had a lot of demos using Raspberry PI 3 and Simplelink SensorTag. Most of the samples were written in C++ and Node.JS and people were impressed that even if we are using Microsoft technologies, we are not limited to C# and .NET. World and Microsoft are changing so fast. Just looking and Azure IoT Hub and new features that were launched and I'm pressed (Jobs, Methods, Device Twin).
On backend my demos covered Stream Analytics, Event Hub, Azure Object Storage and DocumentDB.

Title:
What abo…