Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 3636292
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 19, 20262026-05-19T01:00:46+00:00 2026-05-19T01:00:46+00:00

Say I have 3 tier app- frontend domain and data access. I have read

  • 0

Say I have 3 tier app- frontend domain and data access. I have read that it is a good idea to catch exceptions high in the call stack…so if I get a data-access exception, the domain layer merely does a finally, like so

try{

}finally{
//cleans up
}

and lets the data-access exception percolate to the frontend layer. Does this not break layering by making the front-end layer deal with the innards ? I think that each layer should either handler or wrap and throw exception that it cannot handle to its calling layer…
any thoughts ?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-19T01:00:47+00:00Added an answer on May 19, 2026 at 1:00 am

    Lots of good feedback so far, I’ll give you my take.

    Rule #1. ONLY catch exceptions you are going to actually handle. By handle, I mean handle in such a way that the client’s request can continue. You may catch things long enough to log information (don’t abuse this, usually the stack is enough information) or to convert to a different error that propagates easier (ala Runtime based). But, if you can’t handle it, don’t bother catching it. That’s just extra code that is useless and confusing. Even when you log or convert, you end up rethrowing.

    Realize that most of the time, you can NOT handle an exception. Truly. Many fail to grasp this. But the reality is, if you get an IOException reading or writing to the disk, game over. That request cannot be completed for the user. If your network is flaky and you can’t talk to the database, same thing.

    Rule #2. When you do get an exception that you cannot handle, the only thing you can do is try to fail in such a way that it is helpful to the user. This means, log it for later analysis (including original stack/cause), and then report something as helpful as possible to the user. Clean up whatever you must, so that the system remains in a consistent state.

    Given that this communication with the end user happens at a very high level, that means you usually have to catch at that level. Most of the time, I find that there is very little value in any exception handling between it’s inception point and the top level where you catch it for logging and reporting to the user. I often convert to a form of RuntimeException, but that’s only done to ease propagation through the layers.

    The biggest and most important thing is to realize that you usually can’t handle exceptions, so any code you write for them should be as simple as possible.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Say you have an application divided into 3-tiers: GUI, business logic, and data access.
Let's say that you have a presentation tier in JSF, and that your business
I have a web-app-database 3 tier server setup. Web requests data from app, and
Say I have the following file structure: app/ app.py controllers/ __init__.py project.py plugin.py If
say I have input data like so: firstName | lastName | Country Bob |
Say I have a LINQ-to-XML query that generates an anonymous type like this: var
I have a table, say STUDENTS, that is related one-to-many to another table, CLASSES.
I'm new to WCF. Let's say I have two asp.net apps, one that uses
We have an application, n-tier like structured, but I wouldn't say it's n-tiered. The
Let's say you have a bug that was found in functional testing of a

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.