I'm used to use transaxction blocks in postgresql like begin But in oracle it seems tha. 7 you can't kill/rollback a transaction from another session without killing the owner session I think, allowing to kill/rollback a transaction from another user's session means many design and security rule violations because it requires entering another user session (in the context of the current sql server engine design). I have a long running process that holds open a transaction for the full duration I have no control over the way this is executed
Because a transaction is held open for the full duration, whe. The code within the methods you call need to be transaction aware and enlist in the active transaction This means creating or using classes which are resource managers (see implement your own resource manager You do this by implementing ienlistmentnotification and enlisting in the transaction When the transaction is completed, the transaction manager will call methods as defined on that. Optimistic locking consists in detecting that another transaction has updated/deleted the same row, and throwing the exception you're getting in this case
Pessimistic locking will make your application slow and subject to deadlocks. Could not commit jpa transaction Transaction marked as rollbackonly this exception occurs when you invoke nested methods/services also marked as @transactional. In plain english, what are the disadvantages and advantages of using set transaction isolation level read uncommitted in a query for.net applications and reporting services applications? The alternative is an ambient transaction New in.net 2.0, the transactionscope object (system.transactions.dll) allows use over a range of operations (suitable providers will automatically enlist in the ambient transaction)
Transactionscope offer broader options, begintransaction has a simpler api transactionscope allows to customize the transaction timeout, support nested transactions with various transactionscopeoption support
OPEN
