I'm currently planning on switching my "manual query-writing" code to a nice SQL framework, so I can leave the queries or sql things to the framework, instead of writing the queries myself.
Now I'm wondering how I can get a single record from my table in Entity Framework 4?
I've primarily used SQL like SELECT * FROM {0} WHERE Id = {1}. That doesn't work in EF4, as far as I'm concerned.
Is there a way I can select a single ID-Based record from my Context?
Something like:
public Address GetAddress(int addressId)
{
var result = from Context.Addresses where Address.Id = addressId;
Address adr = result as Address;
return Address;
}
Thank you!
var address = Context.Addresses.First(a => a.Id == addressId);
You can use Single or First methods.
The difference between those methods is that Single expects a single row and throws an exception if it doesn't have a single row.
The usage is the same for both of them
(Based on VS 2015) If you create an .edmx (Add --> ADO.NET Entity Data Model).
Go through the steps to created the ".edmx" and use the following to run the stored procedure. emailAddress is the parameter you are passing to the stored procedure g_getLoginStatus. This will pull the first row into LoginStatus and status is a column in the database:
bool verasity = false;
DBNameEntities db = new DBNameEntities(); // Use name of your DBEntities
var LoginStatus = db.g_getLoginStatus(emailAddress).FirstOrDefault();
if ((LoginStatus != null) && (LoginStatus.status == 1))
{
verasity = true;
}
I understand stored procedures mapping is not supported by my understanding is that I should be able to call stored procedures.
I have quite a few complex stored procedures and with the designer I could create a complex type and I was all good.
Now in code first let's suppose I have the following stored procedure, just put together something silly to give an idea. I want to return a student with 1 address.
In code I have A Student and Address Entity. But no StudentAddressEntity as it's a link table.
I have tried the following but I get an error
Incorrect syntax near '."}
System.Data.Common.DbException {System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException}
ALTER Procedure [dbo].[GetStudentById]
#StudentID int
AS
SELECT *
FROM Student S
left join StudentAddress SA on S.Studentid = sa.studentid
left join Address A on SA.AddressID = A.AddressID
where S.StudentID = #StudentID
C# code:
using (var ctx = new SchoolContext())
{
var student = ctx.Database.SqlQuery<Student>("GetStudentById,#StudentID",
new SqlParameter("StudentID", id));
}
Any examples out there how to call sp and fill a complexType in code first, using out parameters etc.. Can I hook into ADO.NET?
Trying just an SP that returns all students with no parameters I get this error
System.SystemException = Cannot create a value for property
'StudentAddress' of type
'CodeFirstPrototype.Dal.Address'. Only
properties with primitive types are
supported.
Is it because I have in a way ignore the link table?
Any suggestions?
I believe that your exception actually is:
Incorrect syntax near ','.
because this is invalid statement: "GetStudentById,#StudentID". It should be without comma: "GetStudentById #StudentID".
The problem with stored procedures in EF is that they don't support loading navigation properties. EF will materialize only the main entity and navigation properties will not be loaded. This is solved for example by EFExtensions. EFExtensions are for ObjectContext API so you will have to check if it is also usable for DbContext API.
Using EFExtentions it will look something like
using (var context = new SchoolContext())
{
var command = context.CreateStoreCommand("GetStudentById", CommandType.StoredProcedure,
new SqlParameter("StudentID", id));
using (command.Connection.CreateConnectionScope())
using (var reader = command.ExecuteReader())
{
// use the reader to read the data
// my recommendation is to create a Materializer using EFExtensions see
// http://blogs.msdn.com/b/meek/archive/2008/03/26/ado-entity-framework-stored-procedure-customization.aspx
// ex
var student = Student.Materializer.Materialize(reader).SingleOrDefault();
return student;
}
}
I'm currently working on a project which is using EF Code First with POCOs. I have 5 POCOs that so far depends on the POCO "User".
The POCO "User" should refer to my already existing MemberShip table "aspnet_Users" (which I map it to in the OnModelCreating method of the DbContext).
The problem is that I want to take advantage of the "Recreate Database If Model changes" feature as Scott Gu shows at: http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2010/07/16/code-first-development-with-entity-framework-4.aspx - What the feature basically does is to recreate the database as soon as it sees any changes in my POCOs. What I want it to do is to Recreate the database but to somehow NOT delete the whole Database so that aspnet_Users is still alive. However it seems impossible as it either makes a whole new Database or replaces the current one with..
So my question is: Am I doomed to define my database tables by hand, or can I somehow merge my POCOs into my current database and still take use of the feature without wipeing it all?
As of EF Code First in CTP5, this is not possible. Code First will drop and create your database or it does not touch it at all. I think in your case, you should manually create your full database and then try to come up with an object model that matches the DB.
That said, EF team is actively working on the feature that you are looking for: altering the database instead of recreating it:
Code First Database Evolution (aka Migrations)
I was just able to do this in EF 4.1 with the following considerations:
CodeFirst
DropCreateDatabaseAlways
keeping the same connection string and database name
The database is still deleted and recreated - it has to be to for the schema to reflect your model changes -- but your data remains intact.
Here's how: you read your database into your in-memory POCO objects, and then after the POCO objects have successfully made it into memory, you then let EF drop and recreate the database. Here is an example
public class NorthwindDbContextInitializer : DropCreateDatabaseAlways<NorthindDbContext> {
/// <summary>
/// Connection from which to ead the data from, to insert into the new database.
/// Not the same connection instance as the DbContext, but may have the same connection string.
/// </summary>
DbConnection connection;
Dictionary<Tuple<PropertyInfo,Type>, System.Collections.IEnumerable> map;
public NorthwindDbContextInitializer(DbConnection connection, Dictionary<Tuple<PropertyInfo, Type>, System.Collections.IEnumerable> map = null) {
this.connection = connection;
this.map = map ?? ReadDataIntoMemory();
}
//read data into memory BEFORE database is dropped
Dictionary<Tuple<PropertyInfo, Type>, System.Collections.IEnumerable> ReadDataIntoMemory() {
Dictionary<Tuple<PropertyInfo,Type>, System.Collections.IEnumerable> map = new Dictionary<Tuple<PropertyInfo,Type>,System.Collections.IEnumerable>();
switch (connection.State) {
case System.Data.ConnectionState.Closed:
connection.Open();
break;
}
using (this.connection) {
var metaquery = from p in typeof(NorthindDbContext).GetProperties().Where(p => p.PropertyType.IsGenericType)
let elementType = p.PropertyType.GetGenericArguments()[0]
let dbsetType = typeof(DbSet<>).MakeGenericType(elementType)
where dbsetType.IsAssignableFrom(p.PropertyType)
select new Tuple<PropertyInfo, Type>(p, elementType);
foreach (var tuple in metaquery) {
map.Add(tuple, ExecuteReader(tuple));
}
this.connection.Close();
Database.Delete(this.connection);//call explicitly or else if you let the framework do this implicitly, it will complain the connection is in use.
}
return map;
}
protected override void Seed(NorthindDbContext context) {
foreach (var keyvalue in this.map) {
foreach (var obj in (System.Collections.IEnumerable)keyvalue.Value) {
PropertyInfo p = keyvalue.Key.Item1;
dynamic dbset = p.GetValue(context, null);
dbset.Add(((dynamic)obj));
}
}
context.SaveChanges();
base.Seed(context);
}
System.Collections.IEnumerable ExecuteReader(Tuple<PropertyInfo, Type> tuple) {
DbCommand cmd = this.connection.CreateCommand();
cmd.CommandText = string.Format("select * from [dbo].[{0}]", tuple.Item2.Name);
DbDataReader reader = cmd.ExecuteReader();
using (reader) {
ConstructorInfo ctor = typeof(Test.ObjectReader<>).MakeGenericType(tuple.Item2)
.GetConstructors()[0];
ParameterExpression p = Expression.Parameter(typeof(DbDataReader));
LambdaExpression newlambda = Expression.Lambda(Expression.New(ctor, p), p);
System.Collections.IEnumerable objreader = (System.Collections.IEnumerable)newlambda.Compile().DynamicInvoke(reader);
MethodCallExpression toArray = Expression.Call(typeof(Enumerable),
"ToArray",
new Type[] { tuple.Item2 },
Expression.Constant(objreader));
LambdaExpression lambda = Expression.Lambda(toArray, Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<>).MakeGenericType(tuple.Item2)));
var array = (System.Collections.IEnumerable)lambda.Compile().DynamicInvoke(new object[] { objreader });
return array;
}
}
}
This example relies on a ObjectReader class which you can find here if you need it.
I wouldn't bother with the blog articles, read the documentation.
Finally, I would still suggest you always back up your database before running the initialization. (e.g. if the Seed method throws an exception, all your data is in memory, so you risk your data being lost once the program terminates.) A model change isn't exactly an afterthought action anyway, so be sure to back your data up.
One thing you might consider is to use a 'disconnected' foreign key. You can leave the ASPNETDB alone and just reference the user in your DB using the User key (guid). You can access the logged in user as follows:
MembershipUser currentUser = Membership.GetUser(User.Identity.Name, true /* userIsOnline */);
And then use the User's key as a FK in your DB:
Guid UserId = (Guid) currentUser.ProviderUserKey ;
This approach decouples your DB with the ASPNETDB and associated provider architecturally. However, operationally, the data will of course be loosely connected since the IDs will be in each DB. Note also there will be no referential constraints, whcih may or may not be an issue for you.
I want to delete several items from a table using Entity Framework. There is no foreign key / parent object, so I can't handle this with OnDeleteCascade.
Right now I'm doing this:
var widgets = context.Widgets
.Where(w => w.WidgetId == widgetId);
foreach (Widget widget in widgets)
{
context.Widgets.DeleteObject(widget);
}
context.SaveChanges();
It works, but the foreach bugs me. I'm using EF4, but I don't want to execute SQL. I just want to make sure I'm not missing anything -- this is as good as it gets, right? I can abstract the code with an extension method or helper, but somewhere we're still going to be doing a foreach, right?
EntityFramework 6 has made this a bit easier with .RemoveRange().
Example:
db.People.RemoveRange(db.People.Where(x => x.State == "CA"));
db.SaveChanges();
Warning! Do not use this on large datasets!
EF pulls all the data into memory, THEN deletes it. For smaller data sets this might not be an issue but generally avoid this style of delete unless you can guarantee you are only doing very small changes.
You could easily run your process out of memory while EF happily pulls in all the data you specified just to delete it.
using (var context = new DatabaseEntities())
{
context.ExecuteStoreCommand("DELETE FROM YOURTABLE WHERE CustomerID = {0}", customerId);
}
Addition: To support list of ids you can write
var listOfIds = String.Join(',',customerIds.Select(id => $"'{id}'").ToList());
var sql= $#"DELETE [YOURTABLE] WHERE CustomerID in ({listOfIds})";
Note: if CustomerID Is a string, you should double-check for potential SQL injection risks, for integer CustomerID it’s safe
this is as good as it gets, right? I can abstract it with an extension
method or helper, but somewhere we're still going to be doing a
foreach, right?
Well, yes, except you can make it into a two-liner:
context.Widgets.Where(w => w.WidgetId == widgetId)
.ToList().ForEach(context.Widgets.DeleteObject);
context.SaveChanges();
I know it's quite late but in case someone needs a simple solution, the cool thing is you can also add the where clause with it:
public static void DeleteWhere<T>(this DbContext db, Expression<Func<T, bool>> filter) where T : class
{
string selectSql = db.Set<T>().Where(filter).ToString();
string fromWhere = selectSql.Substring(selectSql.IndexOf("FROM"));
string deleteSql = "DELETE [Extent1] " + fromWhere;
db.Database.ExecuteSqlCommand(deleteSql);
}
Note: just tested with MSSQL2008.
Update:
The solution above won't work when EF generates sql statement with parameters, so here's the update for EF5:
public static void DeleteWhere<T>(this DbContext db, Expression<Func<T, bool>> filter) where T : class
{
var query = db.Set<T>().Where(filter);
string selectSql = query.ToString();
string deleteSql = "DELETE [Extent1] " + selectSql.Substring(selectSql.IndexOf("FROM"));
var internalQuery = query.GetType().GetFields(BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance).Where(field => field.Name == "_internalQuery").Select(field => field.GetValue(query)).First();
var objectQuery = internalQuery.GetType().GetFields(BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance).Where(field => field.Name == "_objectQuery").Select(field => field.GetValue(internalQuery)).First() as ObjectQuery;
var parameters = objectQuery.Parameters.Select(p => new SqlParameter(p.Name, p.Value)).ToArray();
db.Database.ExecuteSqlCommand(deleteSql, parameters);
}
It requires a little bit of reflection but works well.
If you don't want to execute SQL directly calling DeleteObject in a loop is the best you can do today.
However you can execute SQL and still make it completely general purpose via an extension method, using the approach I describe here.
Although that answer was for 3.5. For 4.0 I would probably use the new ExecuteStoreCommand API under the hood, instead of dropping down to the StoreConnection.
For anyone using EF5, following extension library can be used: https://github.com/loresoft/EntityFramework.Extended
context.Widgets.Delete(w => w.WidgetId == widgetId);
Entity Framework Core
3.1 3.0 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.1 1.0
using (YourContext context = new YourContext ())
{
var widgets = context.Widgets.Where(w => w.WidgetId == widgetId);
context.Widgets.RemoveRange(widgets);
context.SaveChanges();
}
Summary:
Removes the given collection of entities from the context underlying the set
with each entity being put into the Deleted state such that it will be deleted
from the database when SaveChanges is called.
Remarks:
Note that if System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DbContextConfiguration.AutoDetectChangesEnabled
is set to true (which is the default), then DetectChanges will be called once
before delete any entities and will not be called again. This means that in some
situations RemoveRange may perform significantly better than calling Remove multiple
times would do. Note that if any entity exists in the context in the Added state,
then this method will cause it to be detached from the context. This is because
an Added entity is assumed not to exist in the database such that trying to delete
it does not make sense.
Still seems crazy to have to pull anything back from the server just to delete it, but at least getting back just the IDs is a lot leaner than pulling down the full entities:
var ids = from w in context.Widgets where w.WidgetId == widgetId select w.Id;
context.Widgets.RemoveRange(from id in ids.AsEnumerable() select new Widget { Id = id });
Finally bulk delete has been introduced in Entity Framework Core 7 via the ExecuteDelete command:
context.Widgets
.Where(w => w.WidgetId == widgetId)
.ExecuteDelete();
Something to note here is that ExecuteDelete does not need a SaveChanges, as per its documentation:
This operation executes immediately against the database, rather than being deferred until DbContext.SaveChanges() is called. It also does not interact with the EF change tracker in any way: entity instances which happen to be tracked when this operation is invoked aren't taken into account, and aren't updated to reflect the changes.
I know that the question was asked for EF4, but if you upgrade this is a good alternative!
EF 6.1
public void DeleteWhere<TEntity>(Expression<Func<TEntity, bool>> predicate = null)
where TEntity : class
{
var dbSet = context.Set<TEntity>();
if (predicate != null)
dbSet.RemoveRange(dbSet.Where(predicate));
else
dbSet.RemoveRange(dbSet);
context.SaveChanges();
}
Usage:
// Delete where condition is met.
DeleteWhere<MyEntity>(d => d.Name == "Something");
Or:
// delete all from entity
DeleteWhere<MyEntity>();
For EF 4.1,
var objectContext = (myEntities as IObjectContextAdapter).ObjectContext;
objectContext.ExecuteStoreCommand("delete from [myTable];");
The quickest way to delete is using a stored procedure. I prefer stored procedures in a database project over dynamic SQL because renames will be handled correctly and have compiler errors. Dynamic SQL could refer to tables that have been deleted/renamed causing run time errors.
In this example, I have two tables List and ListItems. I need a fast way to delete all the ListItems of a given list.
CREATE TABLE [act].[Lists]
(
[Id] INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY IDENTITY,
[Name] NVARCHAR(50) NOT NULL
)
GO
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX [IU_Name] ON [act].[Lists] ([Name])
GO
CREATE TABLE [act].[ListItems]
(
[Id] INT NOT NULL IDENTITY,
[ListId] INT NOT NULL,
[Item] NVARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT PK_ListItems_Id PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED (Id),
CONSTRAINT [FK_ListItems_Lists] FOREIGN KEY ([ListId]) REFERENCES [act].[Lists]([Id]) ON DELETE CASCADE
)
go
CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX IX_ListItems_Item
ON [act].[ListItems] ([ListId], [Item]);
GO
CREATE PROCEDURE [act].[DeleteAllItemsInList]
#listId int
AS
DELETE FROM act.ListItems where ListId = #listId
RETURN 0
Now the interesting part of deleting the items and updating Entity framework using an extension.
public static class ListExtension
{
public static void DeleteAllListItems(this List list, ActDbContext db)
{
if (list.Id > 0)
{
var listIdParameter = new SqlParameter("ListId", list.Id);
db.Database.ExecuteSqlCommand("[act].[DeleteAllItemsInList] #ListId", listIdParameter);
}
foreach (var listItem in list.ListItems.ToList())
{
db.Entry(listItem).State = EntityState.Detached;
}
}
}
The main code can now use it is as
[TestMethod]
public void DeleteAllItemsInListAfterSavingToDatabase()
{
using (var db = new ActDbContext())
{
var listName = "TestList";
// Clean up
var listInDb = db.Lists.Where(r => r.Name == listName).FirstOrDefault();
if (listInDb != null)
{
db.Lists.Remove(listInDb);
db.SaveChanges();
}
// Test
var list = new List() { Name = listName };
list.ListItems.Add(new ListItem() { Item = "Item 1" });
list.ListItems.Add(new ListItem() { Item = "Item 2" });
db.Lists.Add(list);
db.SaveChanges();
listInDb = db.Lists.Find(list.Id);
Assert.AreEqual(2, list.ListItems.Count);
list.DeleteAllListItems(db);
db.SaveChanges();
listInDb = db.Lists.Find(list.Id);
Assert.AreEqual(0, list.ListItems.Count);
}
}
You can use extensions libraries for doing that like EntityFramework.Extended or Z.EntityFramework.Plus.EF6, there are available for EF 5, 6 or Core. These libraries have great performance when you have to delete or update and they use LINQ. Example for deleting (source plus):
ctx.Users.Where(x => x.LastLoginDate < DateTime.Now.AddYears(-2))
.Delete();
or (source extended)
context.Users.Where(u => u.FirstName == "firstname")
.Delete();
These use native SQL statements, so performance is great.
This answers is for EF Core 7 (I am not aware if they merged EF Core with EF now or not, before they kept the two separately).
EF Core 7 now supports ExecuteUpdate and ExecuteDelete (Bulk updates):
// Delete all Tags (BE CAREFUL!)
await context.Tags.ExecuteDeleteAsync();
// Delete Tags with a condition
await context.Tags.Where(t => t.Text.Contains(".NET")).ExecuteDeleteAsync();
The equivalent SQL queries are:
DELETE FROM [t]
FROM [Tags] AS [t]
DELETE FROM [t]
FROM [Tags] AS [t]
WHERE [t].[Text] LIKE N'%.NET%'
If you want to delete all rows of a table, you can execute sql command
using (var context = new DataDb())
{
context.Database.ExecuteSqlCommand("TRUNCATE TABLE [TableName]");
}
TRUNCATE TABLE (Transact-SQL) Removes all rows from a table without logging the individual row deletions. TRUNCATE TABLE is similar to the DELETE statement with no WHERE clause; however, TRUNCATE TABLE is faster and uses fewer system and transaction log resources.
You can execute sql queries directly as follows :
private int DeleteData()
{
using (var ctx = new MyEntities(this.ConnectionString))
{
if (ctx != null)
{
//Delete command
return ctx.ExecuteStoreCommand("DELETE FROM ALARM WHERE AlarmID > 100");
}
}
return 0;
}
For select we may use
using (var context = new MyContext())
{
var blogs = context.MyTable.SqlQuery("SELECT * FROM dbo.MyTable").ToList();
}
UUHHIVS's is a very elegant and fast way for batch delete, but it must be used with care:
auto generation of transaction: its queries will be encompassed by a transaction
database context independence: its execution has nothing to do with context.SaveChanges()
These issues can be circumvented by taking control of the transaction. The following code illustrates how to batch delete and bulk insert in a transactional manner:
var repo = DataAccess.EntityRepository;
var existingData = repo.All.Where(x => x.ParentId == parentId);
TransactionScope scope = null;
try
{
// this starts the outer transaction
using (scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required))
{
// this starts and commits an inner transaction
existingData.Delete();
// var toInsert = ...
// this relies on EntityFramework.BulkInsert library
repo.BulkInsert(toInsert);
// any other context changes can be performed
// this starts and commit an inner transaction
DataAccess.SaveChanges();
// this commit the outer transaction
scope.Complete();
}
}
catch (Exception exc)
{
// this also rollbacks any pending transactions
scope?.Dispose();
}
In EF 7 you can use bulk delete
var ids = widgets.Select(x => x.Id).ToList();
await _mrVodDbContext.Widgets.Where(x => ids.Contains(x.Id)).ExecuteDeleteAsync();
EF core generate
DELETE FROM [i]
FROM [Widgets] AS [i]
WHERE [i].[Id] IN (4,3,2,1)
More about deleting or updating in release notes. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/ef/core/what-is-new/ef-core-7.0/whatsnew#basic-executedelete-examples
You can also use the DeleteAllOnSubmit() method by passing it your results in a generic list rather than in var. This way your foreach reduces to one line of code:
List<Widgets> widgetList = context.Widgets
.Where(w => w.WidgetId == widgetId).ToList<Widgets>();
context.Widgets.DeleteAllOnSubmit(widgetList);
context.SubmitChanges();
It probably still uses a loop internally though.
Thanh's answer worked best for me. Deleted all my records in a single server trip. I struggled with actually calling the extension method, so thought I would share mine (EF 6):
I added the extension method to a helper class in my MVC project and changed the name to "RemoveWhere". I inject a dbContext into my controllers, but you could also do a using.
// make a list of items to delete or just use conditionals against fields
var idsToFilter = dbContext.Products
.Where(p => p.IsExpired)
.Select(p => p.ProductId)
.ToList();
// build the expression
Expression<Func<Product, bool>> deleteList =
(a) => idsToFilter.Contains(a.ProductId);
// Run the extension method (make sure you have `using namespace` at the top)
dbContext.RemoveWhere(deleteList);
This generated a single delete statement for the group.
I came up with a great library Zack.EFCore.Batch. It will convert your expression into simple DELETE FROM .... WHERE query. (Like some answers proposed) https://github.com/yangzhongke/Zack.EFCore.Batch
The usage example:
await ctx.DeleteRangeAsync<Book>(b => b.Price > n);
The Zack.EFCore.Batch library has lots of benefits over Z.EntityFramework.Extended https://entityframework-extensions.net/ which does not have true Async methods. (They are just wrappers around sync methods) You can get lots of unexpected issues by using this library in high load environment.
EF 6.=>
var assignmentAddedContent = dbHazirBot.tbl_AssignmentAddedContent.Where(a =>
a.HazirBot_CategoryAssignmentID == categoryAssignment.HazirBot_CategoryAssignmentID);
dbHazirBot.tbl_AssignmentAddedContent.RemoveRange(assignmentAddedContent);
dbHazirBot.SaveChanges();
Best : in EF6 => .RemoveRange()
Example:
db.Table.RemoveRange(db.Table.Where(x => Field == "Something"));
If you are using Generic Repository:
Inside Generic repository, following could be new method.
public void RemoveMultiple(Expression<Func<T, bool>> predicate)
{
IQueryable<T> query = _context.Set<T>().Where(predicate);
_context.Set<T>().RemoveRange(query.AsNoTracking());
}
Usage:
_unitOfWork.YOUR_ENTITY.RemoveMultiple(x => x.AccountId == accountId);
_unitOfWork.Complete();
context.Widgets.RemoveRange(context.Widgets.Where(w => w.WidgetId == widgetId).ToList());
db.SaveChanges();
See the answer 'favorite bit of code' that works
Here is how I used it:
// Delete all rows from the WebLog table via the EF database context object
// using a where clause that returns an IEnumerable typed list WebLog class
public IEnumerable<WebLog> DeleteAllWebLogEntries()
{
IEnumerable<WebLog> myEntities = context.WebLog.Where(e => e.WebLog_ID > 0);
context.WebLog.RemoveRange(myEntities);
context.SaveChanges();
return myEntities;
}
In EF 6.2 this works perfectly, sending the delete directly to the database without first loading the entities:
context.Widgets.Where(predicate).Delete();
With a fixed predicate it's quite straightforward:
context.Widgets.Where(w => w.WidgetId == widgetId).Delete();
And if you need a dynamic predicate have a look at LINQKit (Nuget package available), something like this works fine in my case:
Expression<Func<Widget, bool>> predicate = PredicateBuilder.New<Widget>(x => x.UserID == userID);
if (somePropertyValue != null)
{
predicate = predicate.And(w => w.SomeProperty == somePropertyValue);
}
context.Widgets.Where(predicate).Delete();