Error 3998 Sql Server
Contents |
here for a quick overview of the site Help Center Detailed answers to any questions you might have Meta Discuss the workings and policies
Uncommittable Transaction Is Detected At The End Of The Batch. The Transaction Is Rolled Back. C#
of this site About Us Learn more about Stack Overflow the company what are the things will you look into when you do performance tuning of sql query Business Learn more about hiring developers or posting ads with us Stack Overflow Questions Jobs Documentation Tags Users Badges sql server error levels Ask Question x Dismiss Join the Stack Overflow Community Stack Overflow is a community of 4.7 million programmers, just like you, helping each other. Join them; it only takes a minute:
C# Uncommittable Transaction Is Detected At The End Of The Batch
Sign up uncommittable transaction is detected at the end of batch. the transaction is rolled back up vote 2 down vote favorite We are having problem with the server migration. We have one application that are having so much transactions It working fine on the one database server. But when transfer same database to another server. We are facing the following error.
Xact_state() In Sql Server
Server: Msg 3998, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Uncommittable transaction is detected at the end of the batch. The transaction is rolled back. Same database is copied to the another server with the all data. If we change connectionstring to old server then it is working fine. Can anybody suggest on this? sql sql-server share|improve this question edited Jun 3 '09 at 18:05 Ian Boyd 85.2k150529857 asked May 5 '09 at 19:00 Jalpesh Vadgama 5,291134774 What database versions? –JoshBerke May 5 '09 at 19:03 add a comment| 2 Answers 2 active oldest votes up vote 0 down vote accepted What you seem to have is a problem where the record is acceptable in one database but not theother. Suggest you look at the differnces between the two database structures (yes I know they are supposed to be the same, but clearly they are not). Suspect you will either find a collation difference, a data type differnce, or a data length differnce between the two. YOu might also have a table where the identity definition is missing and thus it can't in
Doomed State ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★ BalmukundMay 11, 20111 0 0 0
Consider a scenario wherein you are what is uncommittable state in sql server doing some operation which is generating an error with Level\Severity 16Xact_abort
and is causing the entire transaction to fail with the following message: Msg 3998, Level 16, transaction count after execute indicates a mismatching number of begin and commit statements State 1, Line 1 Uncommittable transaction is detected at the end of the batch. The transaction is rolled back. Alternatively, you may see errors like the following http://stackoverflow.com/questions/826420/uncommittable-transaction-is-detected-at-the-end-of-batch-the-transaction-is-ro which will rollback entire transaction: Msg 8169, Level 16, State 2, Line 5 Conversion failed when converting from a character string to uniqueidentifier. Note: There are several more errors that could fail with Level\Severity 16. You may want to argue as to why the Severity 16 error message terminates the entire transaction and not continue https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/sqlserverfaq/2011/05/11/errors-raised-with-severitylevel-16-may-cause-transactions-into-doomed-state/ with the batch. And I would say it depends! Typically, the function which decides whether the transaction would get into doomed state or not is called as XACT_STATE(). This function is a scalar function that reports the user transaction state of a current running request. XACT_STATE indicates whether the request has an active user transaction, and whether the transaction is capable of being committed. As per Books Online, this functions returns following three values: 1, 0 or -1. XACT_STATE() = -1 means that the current request has an active user transaction, but an error has occurred that has caused the transaction to be classified as an uncommittable transaction. When a batch finishes running, the Database Engine will automatically roll back any active uncommittable transactions. The request cannot perform any write operations until it rolls back the transaction. The request can only perform read operations until it rolls back the transaction. As per our intensive research we asserted that XACT_STATE changes is not g
people believe. Here are some SQL beliefs or strange ideas that I’ve encountered in the past year. · The column order isn’t important, so long as the column is in the index anywhere, SQL Server can use that column to optimize a where clause. (This one came from a system with only one table (about 25 columns), and it had only one index – a 15 column clustered PK) · Table variables are only in memory (a common misconception) · We have to run Enterprise Edition because we need 4 CPUs (thinking they need Ent Ed when Std will do is another common misconception) · You can pass an array into a proc using dynamic pointers (this one from a MCS SQL consultant!) I’m sure you've heard a few as well, so please add to the list…
Published Friday, December 28, 2007 6:17 PM by Paul Nielsen Filed under: SQL Myths Comment Notification If you would like to receive an email when updates are made to this post, please register here Subscribe to this post's comments using RSS Comments Denis Gobo said: I have a couple of the top of my head 1) replacing a cursor with a while loop, thinking you are not using a cursor thus making it faster. Meanwhile you are still processing per row 2)Thinking you can trap everything with try catch run this to see what I mean BEGIN TRANSACTION TranA BEGIN TRY DECLARE @cond INT; SET @cond = 'A'; END TRY BEGIN CATCH PRINT 'a' END CATCH; COMMIT TRAN TranA This transaction will blow up with the following message Server: Msg 3930, Level 16, State 1, Line 15 The current transaction cannot be committed and cannot support operations that write to the log file. Roll back the transaction. Server: Msg 3998, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Uncommittable transaction is detected at the end of the batch. The transaction is rolled back. We can use XACT_STATE() to check if we need to rollback or not without blowing up. I also used the ERROR_MESSAGE() function to print the error BEGIN TRANSACTION TranA BEGIN TRY DECLARE @cond INT; SET @cond = 'A'; END TRY BEGIN CATCH PRINT ERROR_MESSAGE(); END CATCH; IF XACT_STATE() =0 BEGIN COMMIT TRAN TranA END ELSE BEGIN ROLLBACK TRAN TranA END After running that we can see that the following message was printed Conversion failed when converting the varchar value 'A' to data type int. We trapped the error, rolled back the transaction and the transaction did not blow up 3) a clustered index guarantees order (see Hugo's post (first link in my best posts of the year)) December 28, 2007 7:39 PM Denis Gobo said: 4)Thinking that by chan