Hi, our business model requires one user to belong to several tenants. So we have created accounts for the same user, where each account has the same user name, but different tenant id.
Thank you for the suggestion.
I have tried it, but I bumped into the same issue as already described - using ABP TenantService directly, without implementing a custom one: first INSERT operation was pretty long, but succeeded. However, when I tried to insert another Tenant - it stuck with the same row lock notification (see the screenshot above).
BTW, nested transaction (using two nested IOW) also does not resolve the problem.
I understand that transaction commit when calling CompleteAsync MUST release all the locks, but for some reason it does not work as expected.
P.S. This bug is present in ABP Framework 3.0.5 as well.
P.S.2. BTW - I think Repository needs to be used, not AppService. When I use TenantAppService - the first insert does not rollback if second one fails.
Meanwhile I came up with the following simple solution:
using var uow = _unitOfWorkManager.Begin(requiresNew: true);
var abpTenant = await _abpTenantManager.CreateAsync(input.AbpTenant.Name, input.AbpTenant.EditionId);
input.AbpTenant.MapExtraPropertiesTo(abpTenant);
var tenant = ObjectMapper.Map<CreateTenantDto, Tenant>(input);
tenant.AbpTenant = abpTenant;
var newTenant = await _tenantRepository.InsertAsync(tenant);
await uow.CompleteAsync();
return ObjectMapper.Map<Tenant, TenantDto>(newTenant);
Seems like it works - it is enough to use sole InsertAsync for our Tenant entity, reference AbpTenant entry is inserted automatically, since it's being tracked by uow IUnitOfWork instance, right?
I have also checked the scenario when something is wrong with inserting our Tenant entity - AbpTenant is not inserted either. But the question is - when do I need to use isTransactional: true here? Is it when I have several repository CRUD operations?? Please explain.
Another question is regarding your repositories. I have noticed you never 'play' with CurrentValues.SetValues in DbConext, but always use Update call, so ALL fields are always updated even if not changed. Any reason for that?
UPDATE: Summarizing, I can tell that everything looks fine as long as I use don't use isTransactional: true. For instance, this works in positive scenario:
using var tenantUow = _unitOfWorkManager.Begin(requiresNew: true);
var abpTenant = tenant.AbpTenant;
await _tenantRepository.DeleteAsync(tenant);
await _abpTenantRepository.HardDeleteAsync(abpTenant);
await tenantUow.CompleteAsync();
BUT if something is WRONG with second delete - first delete comes through (not rolled back).
If I use isTransactional: true and intentionally fail second delete for test - the operation just hangs (DB lock):
using var tenantUow = _unitOfWorkManager.Begin(requiresNew: true, isTransactional: true);
var abpTenant = tenant.AbpTenant;
await _tenantRepository.DeleteAsync(tenant);
await _abpTenantRepository.HardDeleteAsync(abpTenant);
await tenantUow.CompleteAsync();
To workaround this, I had to create custom delete method in Tenant repository and made use of TransactionScope
Ok, thank you - I understand all this. But how to resolve the issue with row lock when using isTransactional: true on CompleteAsync?
It does not look like a proper behavior, does it? CompleteAsync needs to commit all the changes within UOW area, but instead, we receive a row lock as shown on screenshots from SQL Manager above. I was able to workaround the issue in one case simply because I have moved all the logic into one repository. Though, I have a different case, where the logic is spread across multiple repositories using within the same UOW instance. And this is where row lock happens.
Please provide me with Oracle test instance where I can connect and I will demostrate it.
Could you please try this example on Oracle DB (any version starting from 12c), since this is what we are using? It would be great to isolate DB and make sure it is not an Oracle issue.
Hi.
We are using commercial version of ABP framework - so it took me some time to change your project to using it instead of free version.
I have replaced TenantManagement projects to Saas projects. There are some other changes. I have also changed the view of QaTenant entity to match our entity.
And I was able to reproduce the lock issue. Please have a look at ABP Tenant transaction deadlock
Looking for your reply ASAP, since we really need transactions.
Hi, I was unable to run the solution without Devart driver. We have uppercased table names and column names. Devart driver setting below eliminates quotes around object names in the generated queries. As a result, queries are not case-sensitive. If Devart driver is not used - the queries contain quotes and tables / columns are not found - "ORA-00942: table or view does not exist":
public class qaEntityFrameworkCoreModule : AbpModule
{
...
public override void ConfigureServices(ServiceConfigurationContext context)
{
...
Configure<AbpDbContextOptions>(options =>
{
var config = Devart.Data.Oracle.Entity.Configuration.OracleEntityProviderConfig.Instance;
config.Workarounds.DisableQuoting = true;
...
}
}
}
Do you by chance know the setting how to achieve the same result without Devart? This setting works only if using Devart Oracle driver, not official driver.
Please be aware we have DB-first solution! Our local DB tables are already created - so we don't want our solution to depend on the code (e.g. make the code setting to generate all the tables in lower- or upper-case). We would like to ignore case instead.
Already tried that, but for some reason it does not work - probably, it does not work with Oracle. Is it possible for you to try transaction thing witn Devart provider (while I am stuck on case mismatch issue) so I was sure the lock was really a Devart problem? Thank you. P.S. How to implement something kind of DB query inteceptor (where I can remove quotes, etc.) by means of ABP framework? This thing did not work:
Configure<AbpDbContextOptions>(options =>
{
options.UseOracle(oracleDbContextOptionsBuilder =>
{
var dbContextOptionsBuilder = new DbContextOptionsBuilder();
dbContextOptionsBuilder.AddInterceptors(new RemoveQuotesInterceptor());
oracleDbContextOptionsBuilder = new Oracle.EntityFrameworkCore.Infrastructure.OracleDbContextOptionsBuilder(dbContextOptionsBuilder);
});
});
liangshiwei, thank you very much for your invaluable help! Our test team will check transactions thouroughly with standard driver to make sure the problem went away. And I will be able to close the ticket, if so.
Hi,
switching current tenant works - thank you. But as to the first part of the question... we would prefer to authenticate and log in identity user after finding him in the repository, I hoped something like this would work (not dealing with password):
using var _ = _abpCurrentTenant.Change(tenantId);
var currentTenant = await _abxTenantRepository.FirstOrDefaultAsync(x => x.AbpId == _abpCurrentTenant.Id.Value);
var identityUser = await _identityUserRepository.FindByNormalizedUserNameAsync(abxUser.Login.ToUpper());
await _signInManager.SignInAsync(identityUser, true);
return ObjectMapper.Map<Tenant, TenantDto>(currentTenant);
However, this does not work.
Am I on right track, all in all? What do I need to make this work (to make our IdentityServer take care on authenticating the selected identityUser and logging him in automatically, it needs to look like a simple page reload)?