I have 20 records in the datatable and i try to insert this records in a database, i want towrite begintransactions , and if all the records correct , i need to commit otherwise i need to rollback.how to do this?
View 2 Repliestable 1
[Code]....
Table 2
[Code]....
my stored procedure
[Code]....
when ever i m passing the wrong the value in second table while updating its not updating the table but the problem it is inserting the value in first table i want the whole trans should proceed if success if not rollback
The website is over half way done and the functionality for the blog is (except for adding posts) is already implemented and working correctlyI have a SQLExpress 2008 backendBlog posts are rendered on the page with full HTML markup within a label control.
All of the above is done and working. Though I am essentially new to creating websites with ASP.NET, CSS and SQL, I am sure that I could simply carry on and make a login page with some controls that would allow me to add records (blog posts) directly to the database on the host server. However, I am fearful of doing this because I know that malicious code can be passed in this way. Also, because of my lack of knowledge, the only way that I know of to pass the code from a control to the database is to disable validation for the page the control is on. Without a doubt I do not want to do that.
So what are my options for getting blog posts into the database? Is it safest for me to fully create the post in html and update a copy of the database that resides on my local machine? If I do it this way, how can I merge the records from the database on the local machine with the records on the remote server?
I have a strange situation.An ASP.NET button click event causes an object in memory to be updated. The object was loaded from NHibernate via Refresh() during Page_Load, but at no time during the entire page life cycle is Commit() or Flush() called.At some point after the page's OnUnload step, the object and any changes made to it are automatically persisted to the database. I cannot see when or where or why this occurs.
View 2 RepliesI'm using a LinqDataSource with a RadGrid. When I Add a new Grid item and click insert the values are immediately saved to the database.Is there a way where they can be actually not put in the database until I give the command?
View 1 RepliesI have this page in my application that contains a couple of grids and a few text boxes. Now these grids are getting populated from a hidden field in the page. My requirement is like the main page should have an "Update All" button where as these grids have their individual Update and delete options. Now when I delete or update anything from the Grids it should do a soft update or delete function and eventually when I hit "Update All" an actual commit statement should be executed.
protected void GridView1_RowUpdating(object sender, GridViewUpdateEventArgs e)
{
begin
GridViewRow row = (GridViewRow)GridView1.Rows[e.RowIndex];
TextBox PhoneNo = (TextBox)row.FindControl("TextBox2");
[code]...
All I am trying to do is to make an update to an existing User and then save the changes to the database. I fooled around with different options and can see that I can make the change to the context during Page_Load, but it does not commit the changes to the Database.
View 5 Repliesi am using the transaction-per-request (session-in-view) pattern for an asp.net web application. I have a couple of points in the application where i want to Save an NHibernate managed entity and then do a couple of more inserts and updates using common sql. These inserts/updates depend on the ID that the NH saved entity will take.
The problem is that the generated id does not exist in the transactions' scope. If i force a flush/commit the id is persisted but if the inserts/updates fail i have to rollback but the flushed/committed entity will not. Currently I'm doing a manual insert for these cases but that is something i want to change. So, is there a way to execute the SQL statement (inside the already open transaction) after the Save() but without forcing a flush/commit?
EDIT: I'm adding a semi-pseudocode example, i got 4 wrong answers so i think people don't understand (how NHibernate works)
At the Begin request i issue a
nhsession.BeginTransaction()
then at some point i do
FooClass fc = new FooClass("value");
nhsession.Save(fc);
ITransaction trans = nhsession.Transaction;
SqlCommand sc = new SqlCommand("some insert/update query that depends on fc's id", (SqlConnection)nhsession.Connection);
sc.Parameters.Add("id", fc.Id); //NHibernate generates the id, note i'm using assigned/hi-lo so no round trip to the db takes place
transaction.Enlist(sc);
try {
sc.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
catch (SqlException ex){
transaction.RollBack();
nhsession.Close();
}
and at the end of the Request i issue a CommitTransaction() and nhsession.Close()
Now this will do absolutely nothing: the FooClass (fc) has not been flushed/commited to the database. The Save() operation that NH has done is up to that point in-memory. That means no sql command has been issued by nhibernate and that means that the SqlCommand (sc) that i fire afterwards will fail miserably as the id does not exist.
If i do a flush/commit between Save() and the SqlCommand the FooClass(fc) _cannot_be_rolled_back_ and that is a bad bad thing.Currently, for this to work i make vanila sql insert using an SqlCommand, and i want to change that. (Why? because i don't want to make vanilla inserts they are susceptible to errors due to schema/model changes, and i got the OR/M for that)
How? i want to notify NHibernate somehow to execute the SqlCommand to corresponds to the Save() insert (hell, it can do all the SqlCommands it has gathered) but without it commiting or flushing!.
Currently i'm also searching for the prepared sql statement that nhibernate produces when flushing/commiting a saved object. Maybe i can just take that string and run it in my SqlCommand that is enlisted in the Transaction.
i have no idea about commit,rollback,tranasaction can any one explain with examples brefiely.
View 2 RepliesI've been looking into how best to do this and wisdom would be appreciated. For read only purposes, I've been happily using LINQ and binding it to a grid. For editing purposes, I've used the LinqDataSource control, enabled the Edit/Delete operations in the process, and I have a nice editable grid bound to some or all of the table's fields.Now I have a situation where I want to edit a few fields in table A, but there are various values in linked table B that I want to display in that grid too (no editing of those). So my query looks like the below. The fields in tblDupes (cleared, notes) are what I want to edit, but I'd like to display those tblVoucher ones.
var theDupes = from d in db.tblDupes
where d.dupeGroup == Ref
select new
[code]...
A similar but different question LINQDataSource - Query Multiple Tables? sent me looking at scott Guthrie's blog entry http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2007/09/07/linq-to-sql-part-9-using-a-custom-linq-expression-with-the-lt-asp-linqdatasource-gt-control.aspx, where he handles various events to have a LinqDataSource with a custom query across tables. This still seems aimed at explicitly designed classes though, even if the class has only a subset of the fields.
So my question is: is there an easy way to allow committing of the changes made to the anonymous collection (a changes.Submit type action), or just an easy way to 'display' fields from another table while not involving them in the updating?EDIT: Thinking more, it doesn't have to be anonymous really. I'd be happy to define a class to contain the elements in that query, since it won't change often. But, those elements would be across two tables, even though only one needs updating. Not sure if that suggests entity framework would be more suitable - I get the feeling it wouldn't - I don't want the whole 'model' always grouping the fields in this way.
answer this:I ran into the following error while trying to Update the user details on the Active Directory:General access denied error
View 2 RepliesI'm getting "This SqlTransaction has completed; it is no longer usable" exception when try to commit my transaction after sqlreader is close.Here is the code sample
[Code]....
...so when I get to commit the transaction it raises the mentioned exception: "This SqlTransaction has completed; it is no longer usable". I have also noticet that Command.Transaction becomes NULL after reader.Close()My question is: Can I use SqlDataReader and SqlTransaction ? Maybe to use BeginExecuteReader and EndExecuteReader ?
I have a multi- statement transcation in my stored procedure, that is either inserting or updating records in table1 and table2.
table1 has a check constraint. Will the check constraint be checked only after I call COMMIT in above transaction, OR will it be checked before I call COMMIT when using INSERT or UPDATE statement?
I just want to know the concept of commit Transaction and Begin Transaction in Asp.net with c# language, I have a certain code in c# given below... where I declare commit transaction and begin transaction. my code is:
public void dial(string traid, string trakey, string account, string ttref)
{
try
{
string[] result = new string[4];
SqlConnection sqlconn_cms = new SqlConnection(sqlconn_cmsstr);
[code]...
I have a stored procedure which is part of the aspnetdb but i am using my own database and therefore these stored procedures are added on my sql server locally.So i uploaded the databases to my hosting company 1and1 and created the stored procedures and tables as those in aspnetdb but i get the error as in the title. this is a standard stored procedure which lives in the aspnetdb database but not sure why this is happeningthe code is below which is for aspnet membership createuser a standard stored procedure
[Code]....
I need to test the counts shown in SSRS report. The report reads the counts from one of the tables.
I need to verify the counts shown in the report. For this I need to insert bulk records in the table (with different userid, datetime, etc).
How can I do this? I really don't want to do this manually.
I was wandering if I can make this faster. I am taking records out of Oracle and putting them into a SQL Server. btw, I am inserting into the Identity column
[Code]....
the application which i created is a web application which doesnt need much of a database,so i am just using the sql express free version which allows 4 gb of data,to avoid disasters iw ould like to delete records which are very old like,1 month,2 months old etc,how can i do this periodically should i do this on client side or the server side...
what id there are 100000 records and if we put this in page load or some method,it could take some time to delete,which i dont want..... how i can automate this process at the server side only
I have data in database and that database is in the ip address .this ip address includes the data when i run the application it will give me all records but after the publish it will show me less data.
View 1 Repliesi try to use select statement to select records within a week from orderdate. like,
"select * from order where orderdate <= DATEADD(day,7,orderdate)";
correct me if wrong.
using vb.net and sql server 2005.I am creating a windows service and querying another type of db (not sql server) and storing the results in a dataReader.Once I have all the records what is the best and most efficient way to do sql inserts?
View 4 RepliesWhen i am inserting my data i am getting this error
An explicit value for the identity column in table 'emp' can only be specified when a column list is used and IDENTITY_INSERT is ON.
i have set Identitty specification and is identity of the table as yes so i am getting this problem whenevr i set it to no i am not getting any error,can anyone explain me why i am getting this error??
i want to read specific records form a table for example(tb)
if the field cosnsist of 100 record and i want to read form 70 to 80 what is the query for this but with out using ID field in the query
Here is my situation: I use the SqlCommond to update some records in the SQL Server in a ASP.NET web site. Users can choose which records they want to update. Sometimes they may choose 40 or 60 records to update at a time.Is there any good way to do it? I do not want to do like it
foreach(string ID in List)
{
Update here
}
I am having the table which contains Name,DOB From this i have to retrive the records of those who are celebrating their birthday is lie between today and coming 7 days. here is my query,
SELECT Profile.Name,
GetProfile.DOB,
FROM Profile
WHERE
Month(DOB)
=
Month(GetDate())
And
Day(DOB)
BETWEEN
Day(GetDate())
AND
Day(DATEADD(Day,6,
[Code]....