C# transaction with handled exception will still roll back?

Question

Considering this piece of code:

using(TransactionScope tran = new TransactionScope()) {

    insertStatementMethod1();
    insertStatementMethod2();
    // this might fail
    try {
        insertStatementMethod3();
    } catch (Exception e) {
        // nothing to do
    }

    tran.Complete();
}

Is anything done in insertStatementMethod1 and insertStatementMethod2 going to be rolled back? In any case? If I want them to execute anyway, I would need to check if it insertStatementMethod3 will fail before the transaction, and build my transaction code based on that?

Update

The code looks similar to this

using(TransactionScope tran = new TransactionScope()) {
    // <standard code>
    yourExtraCode();
    // <standard code>
    tran.Complete();
}

where I get to write the yourExtraCode() method

public void yourExtraCode() {
    insertStatementMethod1();
    insertStatementMethod2();

    // this call might fail
    insertStatementMethod3();
}

I can only edit the yourExtraCode() method, so I cannot chose to be in the transaction scope or no. One simple possible solution would be this:

public void yourExtraCode() {
    insertStatementMethod1();
    insertStatementMethod2();

    // this call might fail
    if (findOutIfIcanInsert()) { // <-- this would come by executing sql query
        try {
            insertStatementMethod3();
        } catch (Exception e) {
            // nothing to do
        }
    }
}

But that would come with the need of looking up things in the db which would affect performance. Is there a better way, or I need to find out before I'd call the method? I tried out and, of course the transaction was rolled back as expected.

check this http://stackoverflow.com/questions/494550/how-does-transactionscope-roll-back-transactions — David Espino, Nov 10 '16 at 06:38
Actually you have the possibility to choose not to be part of an ambient transaction, see my answer below. — Botond Botos, Nov 10 '16 at 07:12

Botond Botos · Accepted Answer · 2016-11-10T07:00:01.753

1

If you don't want your first two methods to be transacted, just move them out from the ambient transaction's scope.

If you don't have control over the code which starts an ambient transaction, you can suppress it by creating a new ambient transaction: using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Suppress)).

edited Nov 10 '16 at 07:00

answered Nov 10 '16 at 06:43

Botond Botos

1,202
13
20

My example is a bit simplified. Actually I get to write a method which was being called inside a transaction already. I do not have control of where the scope starts and ends, but I can write if statements around my calls. However that will come with SQL queries therefore affecting performance. – DDan Nov 10 '16 at 06:50
Answer uptdated – Botond Botos Nov 10 '16 at 07:05

C# transaction with handled exception will still roll back?

1 Answers1