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 …

Run native .NET application in Docker (.NET Framework 4.6.2)

Scope
The main scope of this post is to see how we can run a legacy application written in .NET Framework in Docker.

Context
First of all, let’s define what is a legacy application in our context. By a legacy application we understand an application that runs .NET Framework 3.5 or higher in a production environment where we don’t have any more the people or documentation that would help us to understand what is happening behind the scene.
In this scenarios, you might want to migrate the current solution from a standard environment to Docker. There are many advantages for such a migration, like:

Continuous DeploymentTestingIsolationSecurity at container levelVersioning ControlEnvironment Standardization
Until now, we didn’t had the possibility to run a .NET application in Docker. With .NET Core, there was support for .NET Core in Docker, but migration from a full .NET framework to .NET Core can be costly and even impossible. Not only because of lack of features, but also because once you…