Error: Cannot create new connection because in manual or distributed transaction mode

[CJM]

I have page that starts a transaction and runs several StoredProcs before
committing or rollingback. An initial SP create a header records, and then
the code goes into a loop and runs 4 other SP's once per iteration.

I'd had it working previous, but now I have changed one of the SPs and the
order that they all run in...

Structure of Code:

oConn.BeginTran s

sSQL = "Exec etc"
oConn.Execute sSQL

Do While <some condition>

sSQL = "Exec etc"
oConn.Execute sSQL

sSQL = "Exec etc"
rs = oConn.Execute (sSQL)

sSQL = "Exec etc"
oConn.Execute sSQL <---- fails here

sSQL = "Exec etc"
oConn.Execute sSQL

Loop

oConn.CommitTra ns

I have no idea what this error means, nor why it is occuring now. The most
significant changes I have made have been on the two preceding SPs, and note
that the 2nd one, now returns a value.

Any ideas?

Chris

[Bob Barrows [MVP]]

CJM wrote:

I have page that starts a transaction and runs several StoredProcs
before committing or rollingback. An initial SP create a header
records, and then the code goes into a loop and runs 4 other SP's
once per iteration.

Is there any chance that you can put all of this logic into a single stored
procedure? It seems to me that in addition to having better control over the
transaction handling, using a single call to a stored procedure will be much
more efficient than calling a procedure multiple times in a loop. I've done
things like sending a delimited string of data to a procedure as a single
parameter where it is parsed and processed to avoid making multiple calls to
the database. Is something like this possible? If not, you might wish to
consider inserting the data that needs to be processed into a work table,
and then calling a single procedure to handle it.

Bob Barrows

--
Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.

[CJM]

Thanks, Bob.

Is there a chance I can put into one procedure? An outside chance perhaps!
lol

If I had a better grasp of T-SQL, I would probably do that. It is probably
not that different, but I'm vastly more experienced with ASP/VBScript, so I
have stuck with what I know.

However, this is one of those ridiculous rush jobs so I dont have any time
to invest in this. [We identified that a db was needed in Aug '03, the new
service started Jan '04, DB to support new service was requested in Mar
'04!]

I've found a workaround - using a seperate connection for the one SP that
returns a value. Hardly ideal, but it buys me some time.

However, I'm making a list of post-project tasks; I'll add combining SPs to
it.

"Bob Barrows [MVP]" <re******@NOyah oo.SPAMcom> wrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP11.phx.gbl. ..

CJM wrote:

I have page that starts a transaction and runs several StoredProcs
before committing or rollingback. An initial SP create a header
records, and then the code goes into a loop and runs 4 other SP's
once per iteration.
Is there any chance that you can put all of this logic into a single

stored procedure? It seems to me that in addition to having better control over the transaction handling, using a single call to a stored procedure will be much more efficient than calling a procedure multiple times in a loop. I've done things like sending a delimited string of data to a procedure as a single
parameter where it is parsed and processed to avoid making multiple calls to the database. Is something like this possible? If not, you might wish to
consider inserting the data that needs to be processed into a work table,
and then calling a single procedure to handle it.

Bob Barrows

--
Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.