Hello Harald,
I am not quite sure what your question is.
When executing an SQL Statement we catch exceptions of type
java.sql.SQLException and wrap them inside a StatementFailedException (this is
done in DBDatabase.executeSQL(...)). But it is also possible that you get an
UnexpectedReturnValueException.
We do this to perform logging and to provide a consistent exception interface
(org.apache.empire.exceptions.EmpireException).
You may catch this exception in your code and perform a rollback.
Usually you may want to perform several updates inside a single transaction
like this:
try {
// Update three records in one transaction
rec1.update(conn);
rec2.update(conn);
rec3.update(conn);
db.commit(conn);
} catch(Exception e) {
db.rollback(conn);
}
Regards,
Rainer
> from: Harald Kirsch [mailto:[email protected]]
> to: [email protected]
> re: Transactions, Exceptions and Empire-db
>
> Hi,
>
> looking at the FAQ it says that transactions are my own business when using
> empire-db. Fair enough.
>
> Any exceptions thrown during db operations within a transaction should
> result in a rollback, but when I look at DBrecord.update(), it does not throw
> any exceptions.
>
> Despite the fact that Martin Fowler proclaims "the debate is over"
> (cited here:
> http://theknowledge.me.uk/mywiki/concepts/exceptions/The%20Need%20
> to%20Document%20Runtime%20Exceptions.html)
> and wants us to only use unchecked exceptions, I am now left to explore the
> source code to figure out into which unchecked exception the inevitable
> SQLException is converted during DBrecord.update(). (It is
> StatementFailedException.)
>
> And I need to know, because I must catch it to perform the rollback --- at
> least this is what I reckon.
>
> Am I right or am I wrong?
>
> Harald.
