Transaction and Access

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jacky
  • Start date Start date
J

Jacky

I am using Access which doesn't support transaction. is it mean that even I
am using ASP and Begin.Trans command, but still can't roll back the
transaction?

Jacky
 
Access supports transactions. What leads you to believe it doesn't?

What's the code you're using?
 
At Enterprise requirements
Conversely, the Jet engine does not support atomic transactions: It does
not guarantee that all changes performed within a transaction boundary are
committed or rolled back.
Click to expand...

The above is correct, but then again, when any server system craps out, it
is VERY hard to ensure the above, even with sql server. However, since all
records are "timestamped", then it is quite good.

As a general rule, you can freely use transactions with JET. There is the
possible situations where the server crashes that you changes are not
atomic.

Depending on your applications, if you need 100% atomic transactions, then
the JET engine might not be a good choice. However, if you just need in your
general coding the ability to roll back changes due to some condition in
your code, or have a user "cancel" their changes, then the transaction
ability in the JET engine is just fine.

So, are you using transactions to make your coding job easer, or is your
reason to ensure atomic updates in the event of a crash? (whatever your
answer here is to going to determine if JET is suitable for your needs).

I mean popular accounting systems like Simply Accounting use the same JET
engine and also the same mdb file format that ms-access uses. I don't see
complaints about simply accounting not being a good product. So, sure, there
is some increased risk in using a file based engine like JET as opposed to a
server based engine that it atomic.
 
Thank you very much!!!

Jacky
Albert D. Kallal said:
The above is correct, but then again, when any server system craps out, it
is VERY hard to ensure the above, even with sql server. However, since all
records are "timestamped", then it is quite good.

As a general rule, you can freely use transactions with JET. There is the
possible situations where the server crashes that you changes are not
atomic.

Depending on your applications, if you need 100% atomic transactions, then
the JET engine might not be a good choice. However, if you just need in your
general coding the ability to roll back changes due to some condition in
your code, or have a user "cancel" their changes, then the transaction
ability in the JET engine is just fine.

So, are you using transactions to make your coding job easer, or is your
reason to ensure atomic updates in the event of a crash? (whatever your
answer here is to going to determine if JET is suitable for your needs).

I mean popular accounting systems like Simply Accounting use the same JET
engine and also the same mdb file format that ms-access uses. I don't see
complaints about simply accounting not being a good product. So, sure, there
is some increased risk in using a file based engine like JET as opposed to a
server based engine that it atomic.

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
(e-mail address removed)
http://www.attcanada.net/~kallal.msn
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top