Concurrency configuration in Table Adapter

Question

0.00/5 (No votes)

See more:

Hello,

In ASP.NET (framework 3.5) Visual studio 2010, I'm using the TableAdapter Configuration Wizard to create/configure a TableAdapter for a very simple SQL Table.
I make sure the Advanced Option "Use Optimistic Concurrency" is checked. (The Generate Insert, Update, and Delete Statements box is checked too.) The wizard seems to complete just fine, but the generated statements don't look like they're taking advantage of optimistic concurrency.
When I re-run the TableAdapter Configuration wizard to look at the "Use Optimistic Concurrency" checkbox, it is NOT checked, even though I definitely checked it the previous time I ran the wizard.
Any idea's why "Use Optimistic Concurrency" checkbox getting unchecked after configuration of TableAdapter?

Thanks,

Posted 13-Jan-15 1:49am

Bh@gyesh

Add a Solution

Comments

Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter 13-Jan-15 7:56am

Does your where clause in update statement contains only the key fields or all the fields are there?

R@jd33p 16-Jan-15 1:41am

Both statements, Update and Delete containing all fields with WHERE clause. Please refer below
=>> DELETE FROM Tablename
WHERE (Keyfiled = @Original_Keyfiled) AND (Column1 = @Original_Column1) AND (Column2 = @Original_Column2)
=>> UPDATE TableName
SET Column1 = @Column1,Column2 = @Column2
WHERE (Keyfiled = @Original_Keyfiled) AND (Column1 = @Original_Column1) AND (Column2 = @Original_Column2)

Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter 16-Jan-15 1:42am

So optimistic concurrency IS in use!

R@jd33p 16-Jan-15 1:45am

Yes. it's IN use but not getting any result.
I followed below link as reference:
http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/uploadfile/john_charles/implementing-optimistic-concurrency-control-in-Asp-Net-2-0/

Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter 16-Jan-15 1:56am

I didn't got you! What do you mean by 'not getting any result'?

R@jd33p 16-Jan-15 2:01am

While updating same record by two users atleast should get message on screen that concurrency performed (using DBConcurrencyException) but in this case not getting any message or exception.

Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter 16-Jan-15 2:13am

To get the exception you have to do the update in a very special way...
1. User A reads (select) the record
2. User B reads (select) the very same record and updates it
3. User A updates the record

R@jd33p 16-Jan-15 2:27am

I have tried similar way to raise exception but no luck. If you have any reference/example regarding this implementation please share.

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)