MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive



Home » MIDRANGE-L » December 2013

RE: best practice for web client updates to multiple tables



fixed

This statement "The failed updates could be time-outs, user cancelling session (after long delay), or logic halt in client (they are working on identifying those)." Makes me wonder if the way the web side is designed does not lend itself to benefitting from commitment control. If the web client is stateless and is updating a couple of these 11 tables for each item added to the order, then waits for more items, then the user has to finalize the shipping info which updates some additional tables and then provides payment info which updates a few more, I don't think a "begin commit" then the first item is added and an "end commit" when payment is done would work.

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of J Franz
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 3:20 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: best practice for web client updates to multiple tables

Charles,
 
Your point is well made.
 
 
Jim


________________________________
From: Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: best practice for web client updates to multiple tables


you need a better C# developer...

Actually, I'm shocked that they wouldn't have originally written the app
using transactions in the first place.  Which would have meant coming to
you with a "why are we getting SQL7008 - Table not valid" since the tables
aren't journaled.

While I can't say I've used transaction in C#, I have used them in Java.
It's not that big a deal.

Start journaling on your tables, then tell the C# guys that their app needs
to use transactions.

Charles


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 1:27 PM, J Franz <franz400@xxxxxxx> wrote:

<quote>Why do you think commitment control is a larger effort to
implement?</quote>

That was a comment from the C# developer.

Jim



________________________________
From: Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: best practice for web client updates to multiple tables


Commitment control is the "right" answer.

I don't see stored procedures solving this without commitment control.

Why do you think commitment control is a larger effort to implement?

Charles


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:59 PM, J Franz <franz400@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Having an interesting discussion with our C# developers over best method
to insert/update new orders to our system. No current journaling on the
11
tables updated for a new order.
We have had instances of "partial updates" in our testing.
The failed updates could be time-outs, user cancelling session (after
long
delay), or logic halt in client (they are working on identifying those).
These are customer entered orders, not employee entered, and network
issues can be a factor.
There are couple tables that hold the "working order" until submit.
I have suggested update through stored procedure, so all the final
updates
are code running on the i.
Committment control has been mentioned as well, but seen as a much larger
effort to implement.
This would be many hundreds of orders per day.
Jim Franz
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.


--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.







Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact