Screencast explaining problem: https://youtu.be/B-Q3T5KpiYk
When flowing a transaction from a client to a service Transaction.Current becomes null after awaiting a service to service call.
Unless of course you create a new TransactionScope in your service method as follows:
[OperationBehavior(TransactionScopeRequired = true)]
public async Task CallAsync()
{
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeAsyncFlowOption.Enabled))
{
await _service.WriteAsync();
await _service.WriteAsync();
scope.Complete();
}
}
Why TransactionScopeAsyncFlowOption isn't enabled by default I don't know, but I don't like to repeat myself so I figured I'd always create an inner transactionscope with that option using a custom behavior.
It doesn't even have to be a service to service call, an await to a local async method also nulls Transaction.Current. To clearify with an example
[OperationBehavior(TransactionScopeRequired = true)]
public async Task CallAsync()
{
await WriteAsync();
// Transaction.Current is now null
await WriteAsync();
}
I created a Message Inspector, implementing IDispatchMessageInspector and attached it as a service behavior, code executes and everyting no problem there, but it doesn't have the same effect as declaring the transactionscope in the service method.
public class TransactionScopeMessageInspector : IDispatchMessageInspector
{
public object AfterReceiveRequest(ref Message request, IClientChannel channel, InstanceContext instanceContext)
{
var transactionMessage = (TransactionMessageProperty)OperationContext.Current.IncomingMessageProperties["TransactionMessageProperty"];
var scope = new TransactionScope(transactionMessage.Transaction, TransactionScopeAsyncFlowOption.Enabled);
return scope;
}
public void BeforeSendReply(ref Message reply, object correlationState)
{
var transaction = correlationState as TransactionScope;
if (transaction != null)
{
transaction.Complete();
transaction.Dispose();
}
}
}
by looking at the identifiers when debugging I can see that it in fact is the same transaction in the message inspector as in the service but after the first call, i.e.
await _service_WriteAsync();
Transaction.Current becomes null. Same thing if not getting the current transaction from OperationContext.Current in the message inspector as well so it's unlikely that is the problem.
Is it even possible to accomplish this? It appears like the only way is to declare a TransactionScope in the service method, that is:
public async Task CallAsync()
{
var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeAsyncFlowOption.Enabled);
await _service.WriteAsync();
await _service.WriteAsync();
scope.Complete();
}
with the following service contract it's obvious that we get an exception on the second service call if transaction.current became null inbetween
[OperationContract, TransactionFlow(TransactionFlowOption.Mandatory)]
Task WriteAsync();
TransactionScope provides an implicit programming model in which the transactions are automatically managed by the infrastructure. It provides a simple mechanism for you to specify a code block to participate in a transaction.
Turns out we shouldn't really be using the async/await keyword on the server together with distributed transactions, see this blog post for details.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With