# Transactions Provider **URL:** \ **Category:** Ignition\ **Created:** [November 9, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transactions-provider/2329 "2010-11-09T17:19:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![bryan\_cook](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a8b319/32.png) [@bryan\_cook](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/bryan_cook)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transactions-provider/2329/1 "2010-11-09T17:19:35Z")
I’d like to see the provider model you’ve used for SQLTags implemented with transactions as well. When using a Database Driving/Database Provider with SQLTags, you’re provided with multiple points-of-expansion, a wonderful feature IMHO. I’d love to see that same functionality carried over to transactions. ---
**Author:** ![Colby.Clegg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/colby.clegg/32/3282_2.png) [@Colby.Clegg](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Colby.Clegg)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 9:08pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transactions-provider/2329/2 "2010-11-09T21:08:03Z")
Perhaps you could extend your request with more information about what you’d like to see… what kind of format/feed back would you want? The ability to define multiple address/value pairs to write to OPC as a group with some sort of result feedback? Something more complex? I’m interested in exploring something like this, but am curious as to what you have in mind, more specifically. Regards, ---
**Author:** ![bryan\_cook](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a8b319/32.png) [@bryan\_cook](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/bryan_cook)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:36am UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transactions-provider/2329/3 "2010-11-10T00:36:11Z")
With SQLTags, I can create SQLTags on the fly, edit meta properties, etc. I’ve got access to all information pertaining to a SQLTag from a database, a nice benefit considering myself and a handful of my co-workers are SQL-saavy. With transactions, I can have that same level of flexibility. I can create transaction groups on the fly, enable or disable them, add or remove group items, adjust an item’s expression, etc. With these options available, I think it’ll initiate a lot of creative thinking and solutions. I’ve requested similar flexibility [a while back before Ignition](http://www.inductiveautomation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3757) and [hinted at it again](http://www.inductiveautomation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=4949) before the SDK was released. I think stretching the provider model to transactions could provide some of the flexibility I was asking about a while back. An example … I’d like to create a tag logging system. I want to build an interface that’d essentially allow users to create transactions. A transaction can be created, populated with items, given a trigger, and put into commission immediately. Currently, I’ve got a solution that lets users select tags for logging, but everything’s built around a single transaction I’ve created in the designer. I can’t allow the user to select more tags than I’ve prepared for in the transaction. A provider model would let me create additional group items on the fly. I can provide the example if it’d help clarify. Thanks in advance for hearing me out! ---
**Author:** ![bryan\_cook](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a8b319/32.png) [@bryan\_cook](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/bryan_cook)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2010, 7:21pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transactions-provider/2329/4 "2010-11-11T19:21:06Z")
[Robert’s request](http://www.inductiveautomation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=5335) could be addressed by this as well … ---
**Author:** ![Colby.Clegg](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/colby.clegg/32/3282_2.png) [@Colby.Clegg](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Colby.Clegg)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 12:35am UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transactions-provider/2329/5 "2010-11-16T00:35:00Z")
I was thinking about this, and don’t think it would be too hard. Basically, you can see from the XML export that group configuration is basically just Key/Value pairs anyhow, with some basic structure for arrays that could probably be encoded fairly easily in a database structure similar to SQLTags. Then I was thinking of a module plugin that added a new type of “folder” that monitored these tables in the specified data connection and showed them in a read-only fashion (I suppose, could be fully bi-directional) and ran them. I can’t give any real time line on this, but what should really happen is that we should take a look at polishing up the transaction group portion of the module sdk, and then I should write this as a plugin example. Cleaning up the SDK is something I hope to get involved in by the end of the year, so we’ll see. Regards, ---
**Author:** ![bryan\_cook](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a8b319/32.png) [@bryan\_cook](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/bryan_cook)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 6:08pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/transactions-provider/2329/6 "2010-11-23T18:08:12Z")
I think that’d be a reasonable approach. I’d tackle it myself as I’ve been looking for a reason to finally dig into the SDK … unfortunately, I never have enough time available to do so! Can you make an XML Schema for the transaction group exports available?