As of December 1, 2020, Focal Point is retired and repurposed as a reference repository. We value the wealth of knowledge that's been shared here over the years. You'll continue to have access to this treasure trove of knowledge, for search purposes only.
Join the TIBCO Community TIBCO Community is a collaborative space for users to share knowledge and support one another in making the best use of TIBCO products and services. There are several TIBCO WebFOCUS resources in the community.
From the Home page, select Predict: WebFOCUS to view articles, questions, and trending articles.
Select Products from the top navigation bar, scroll, and then select the TIBCO WebFOCUS product page to view product overview, articles, and discussions.
Request access to the private WebFOCUS User Group (login required) to network with fellow members.
Former myibi community members should have received an email on 8/3/22 to activate their user accounts to join the community. Check your Spam folder for the email. Please get in touch with us at community@tibco.com for further assistance. Reference the community FAQ to learn more about the community.
I have a user interface that presents a series of records in a Prev/Next fashion where the user can move to the one they want and make changes. I offer to let them delete the current record as well, and when they do I pull the record with the same keys from the db and issue a delete command on it. But -- I don't commit the change. I wait. There's a Save button at the bottom and I don't want anything to change unless the user explicitly presses the Save button. So the deletion is presumably in the Before Image waiting for a commit or rollback.
The user then makes some other changes to records, and clicks Save. The save button contains the Commit. This save processes the changes to records, but not the earlier deletion. It's lost. It appears that the delete transaction has been dropped on the floor.
I can code around this, but I'm surprised it functions this way. Can one of you people with an "I Love Cactus" shirt chime in on whether this is what you would expect to happen or not?
J.
Posts: 1012 | Location: At the Mast | Registered: May 17, 2007
The COMMIT should work across multiple transactions; there are situations that give an implied commit, but I've never seen an implied rollback within a single transaction.
More details would be needed, and I am assuming this is a persistent application, to view the start and end points of a transaction.
In normal mode I tend not to hang onto uncommitted transactions, favoring the 'do it now or not at all' approach, so I have never come across this scenario.
Alan. WF 7.705/8.007
Posts: 1451 | Location: Portugal | Registered: February 07, 2007
Theoretically this can happen if you indeed pull the record to be deleted from the db and issue the delete for it without using stacks or reloading the stack. Then what might happen is probably that the stack, which possibly still contains the deleted record, gets written back to the db, thereby effectively undoing the delete. My own experience is that if no error is returned with the delete, the delete has been done. Commit will make sure. So the only possibility is, logically speaking, that it gets written back because it is still in the stack. In cases like these, I always prefer to build a delete stack and a revise stack which both get processed upon activation of the save button. Revise stack first, delete stack second, commit third.
GamP
- Using AS 8.2.01 on Windows 10 - IE11.
in Focus since 1988
Posts: 1961 | Location: Netherlands | Registered: September 25, 2007
I agree with you GamP. It is safer to hold the data changes locally in a Stack than in a DB waiting for a commit. What happens if a user walks away from a screen? How long will any transaction be held onto?
Another thought occurred, but has not been tried. What happens to an uncommitted transaction if a Reposition is issued? Doesn't that affect the DB cursors?
Alan. WF 7.705/8.007
Posts: 1451 | Location: Portugal | Registered: February 07, 2007