Hi.Our discussion was private so nobody else know its contents ;) BTW the Transaction-context and Ado-context is an old pending task... Behind that is the concept of NH's Transaction : so far, talk about a NH's transaction and talk about IDbTransaction is, in practice, the same. With BeginTransaction we are starting a Ado-transaction, when we are setting the isolation-level we are talking about the isolation-level of the Ado-transaction and so on....
To be short, think about what are doing Castle, Spring and so on... the solution follow the same concept: all work behind a ITransaction and ITransactionFactory implementations and the ITransactionFactory is configurable since 1.2.0 (if I well remember). Before yours changes, in the trunk, I begin the work in my PC but well... the work is not so short and, unfortunately, the day has 24 hours. I will back on it hopefully before NH2.1.0Alpha1. Tyler: if you want check the JAVA implementation... I know that we can't implements all things in the same way but, as we doing in NH, you can take the concept and then implement the solution in .NET way; your help is welcome. 2009/2/16 Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> > That might break a lot of things with NSB.NSB assumes that if you rollback > the DTC, it is safe to reprocess the message. You need to be aware of this. > > Fabio, > What would be involved in the port? > > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Tyler Burd <[email protected]> wrote: > >> That makes sense. I'll put a patch together in the interim. If I can >> help out with the TX provider in any way let me know; I'd be more than >> willing to dedicate some time. >> >> >> >> As to what I am trying to do: I'm using NServiceBus, which as you know >> automatically surrounds the call to receive a message in a >> TransactionScope. Because the db driver (Npgsql) has incomplete support for >> TransactionScopes I'm getting lots of errors from within NH when the scope >> completes. So, as a stop-gap solution I would like to disable the >> enlistment for the driver and NH, and then surround all message handling in >> a normal db transaction. Not a perfect solution, I admit, but the only one >> available to me with the driver I'm using. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On >> Behalf Of *Ayende Rahien >> *Sent:* Monday, February 16, 2009 5:23 PM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* [nhusers] Re: TransactionScope and dbs without >> Sys.Transactions support >> >> >> >> There is not way of doing that, and a patch would be welcome. >> >> Although, at this point, I would say that we DO need the TX provider that >> Fabio & I discussed recently. >> >> If we want to add more TX behaviors, we want to do it in a disciplined >> fashion. >> >> >> >> May I ask what you are trying to do that you want to separate the two? >> >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Tyler Burd <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I'm using the NH trunk; this includes changes by Ayende to implement full >> System.Transactions support. Unfortunately, I'm working with a driver that >> seems to have very unstable support for System.Transactions (Npgsql 2.02). >> Because of this, I would like NHibernate to NOT enlist in an ambient >> TransactionScope, but there doesn't seem to be any way to configure that. >> Am I missing something, or should I go ahead and create a patch for this? >> >> >> >> Thanks! >> >> Tyler Burd >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- Fabio Maulo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
