nanov
commented
4 years ago Hi!
Well you have a few options here, the one i would choose is not to implement the sequencer as an aggregate. There is one question that needs to be asked here:
- Do you really need to 'undo' the number generation? Maybe having just ascending numbers ( who maybe not be always +1 ) works for you?
If so there are many ways to achieve this fairly cleanly, one idea that pops into mind is to use the aggregateId generation functionality ( async ) and then generate ids out of somewhere ( a mongo / redis collection and using the $inc operator will do for example ).
If having a following sequence number is a hard requirement and you, you could design a service with locks to generate those ids for you, or if you would like to do it with aggregates, i would implement something as following:
Two aggregates -> sequencer and ticket - as you have done.
For creating a ticket ( ie assigning a number ) you should do something as following :
command to sequencer -> CreateTicket -> increment seq ( event ) -> businessRule -> fire somehow a create command on the ticket aggregate with the sequence inside and wait for the result ( ie successful or not / created event whatever ) -> if the result is successful than the business rule is fine, otherwise reject the command.
Some things to have in mind:
- Ticket aggregate can be created only from the sequencer one.
- The sequence aggregate will be locked until the ticket is created successfully.
- This creates a bottleneck on the ticket creation part.
Bear in mind that event with auto-incremented field in sql you don't get grantees that numbers will be always following, if a transaction is rolled back some numbers may be skipped.
Hello, I'm trying to figure out how to make a transaction on two aggregates. I have the first aggregate "sequencer" for numbers and the aggregate "ticket". It should work like this: I get a number from a sequencer, which I assign to the ticket and I create it. If the ticket creation return an error, I need to undo the assigned number and discard getNumber command. Is there a solution for my use case? E.g. do a lock on both aggregates at the same time and after updating them make commit both aggregates. I looked at your library for SAGA, but it is only for generating commands based on events but does not allow invalidating previous commands.