NET Core MongoDb Update/Replace exclude fields - mongodb

I'm trying to complete a general repository for all of the entities in my application. I Have a BaseEntity with property Id, CreatorId and LastModifiedUserId. Now I'd like to Update a record in a collection, without having to modify the field CreatorId, so I have (from the client) an Entity valorized with some fields updated that I want to update.
Hi have 2 ways:
UpdateOneAsync
ReplaceOneAsync
The repo is created like this:
public class BaseRepository<T> : IRepository<T> where T : BaseEntity
{
public async Task<T> Replace/Update(T entity){...}
}
So it's very hard to use Update(1), since I should retrieve with reflection all the fields of T and exclude the ones that I don't want to update.
With Replace(2) I cannot find a way to specify which fields i should exclude when replacing an object with another. Projectionproperty in FindOneAndReplaceOptions<T>() just excludes the fields on the document that is returned after the update.
Am I missing a way in the replace method to exclude the fields or should I try to retrieve the fields with reflection and use a Update?

I don't know if this solution is ok for you .. what i do is :
Declare in Base Repo a method like
public virtual bool Update(TEntity entity, string key)
{
var result = _collection.ReplaceOne(x => x.Id.Equals(key), entity, new UpdateOptions
{
IsUpsert = false
});
return result.IsAcknowledged;
}
then in your controller when you want to update your entities is there where you set the prop you want to change .. like:
[HttpPut]
[ProducesResponseType(typeof(OrderDTO), 200)]
[ProducesResponseType(400)]
public async Task<ActionResult<bool>> Put([FromBody] OrderDTO value)
{
try
{
if (!ModelState.IsValid) return BadRequest(ModelState);
var orderOnDb = await _orderService.FindAsync(xx => xx.Id == value.Id);
if (orderOnDb == null) return BadRequest(Constants.Error.NOT_FOUND_ON_MONGO);
// SET PROPERTY TO UPDATE (MANUALLY)
orderOnDb.LastUpdateDate = DateTime.Now;
orderOnDb.PaymentMethod = value.PaymentMethod;
orderOnDb.StateHistory = value.StateHistory;
//Save on db
var res = await _orderRepo.UpdateAsync(orderOnDb, orderOnDb.Id);
return res;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
_logger.LogCritical(ex, ex.Message);
throw ex;
}
}
Hope it helps you!!!

Related

storing object in cosmos db returns bad request?

I seem to be unable to store a simple object to cosmos db?
this is the database model.
public class HbModel
{
public Guid id { get; set; }
public string FormName { get; set; }
public Dictionary<string, object> Form { get; set; }
}
and this is how I store the data into the database
private static void SeedData(HbModelContext dbContext)
{
var cosmosClient = dbContext.Database.GetCosmosClient();
cosmosClient.ClientOptions.AllowBulkExecution = true;
if (dbContext.Set<HbModel>().FirstOrDefault() == null)
{
// No items could be picked hence try seeding.
var container = cosmosClient.GetContainer("hb", "hb_forms");
HbModel first = new HbModel()
{
Id = Guid.NewGuid(),//Guid.Parse(x["guid"] as string),
FormName = "asda",//x["name"] as string,
Form = new Dictionary<string, object>() //
}
string partitionKey = await GetPartitionKey(container.Database, container.Id);
var response = await container.CreateItemAsync(first, new PartitionKey(partitionKey));
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("Already have data");
}
}
private static async Task<string> GetPartitionKey(Database database, string containerName)
{
var query = new QueryDefinition("select * from c where c.id = #id")
.WithParameter("#id", containerName);
using var iterator = database.GetContainerQueryIterator<ContainerProperties>(query);
while (iterator.HasMoreResults)
{
foreach (var container in await iterator.ReadNextAsync())
{
return container.PartitionKeyPath;
}
}
return null;
}
but when creating the item I get this error message
A host error has occurred during startup operation '3b06df1f-000c-4223-a374-ca1dc48d59d1'.
[2022-07-11T15:02:12.071Z] Microsoft.Azure.Cosmos.Client: Response status code does not indicate success: BadRequest (400); Substatus: 0; ActivityId: 24bac0ba-f1f7-411f-bc57-3f91110c4528; Reason: ();.
Value cannot be null. (Parameter 'provider')
no idea why it fails?
the data should not be formatted incorreclty?
It also fails in case there is data in the dictionary.
What is going wrong?
There are several things wrong with the attached code.
You are enabling Bulk but you are not following the Bulk pattern
cosmosClient.ClientOptions.AllowBulkExecution = true is being set, but you are not parallelizing work. If you are going to use Bulk, make sure you are following the documentation and creating lists of concurrent Tasks. Reference: https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db/sql/tutorial-sql-api-dotnet-bulk-import#step-6-populate-a-list-of-concurrent-tasks. Otherwise don't use Bulk.
You are blocking threads.
The call to container.CreateItemAsync(first, new PartitionKey("/__partitionKey")).Result; is a blocking call, this can lead you to deadlocks. When using async operations (such as CreateItemAsync) please use the async/await pattern. Reference: https://github.com/davidfowl/AspNetCoreDiagnosticScenarios/blob/master/AsyncGuidance.md#avoid-using-taskresult-and-taskwait
The PartitionKey parameter should be the value not the definition.
On the call container.CreateItemAsync(first, new PartitionKey("/__partitionKey")) the Partition Key (second parameter) should be the value. Assuming your container has a Partition Key Definition of /__partitionKey then your documents should have a __partitionKey property and you should pass the Value in this parameter of such property in the current document. Reference: https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db/sql/troubleshoot-bad-request#wrong-partition-key-value
Optionally, if your documents do not contain such a value, just remove the parameter from the call:
container.CreateItemAsync(first)
Be advised though that this solution will not scale, you need to design your database with Partitioning in mind: https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db/partitioning-overview#choose-partitionkey
Missing id
The model has Id but Cosmos DB requires id, make sure the content of the document contains id when serialized.

Delete multiple row with ids without foreach and postman test

I have a little problem. But I dont know why it doesnt work. And I dont know how to post all ids by postman.
I am using unit of work with generic repository. I want to send int[] ids to my controller. I dont want to send entity. I searched a lot it today. And I changed my code. But what is problem now?
This is my repostiroy:
public async Task DeleteRangeAsync(Expression<Func<T, bool>> predicate)
{
IQueryable<T> query = _dbSet.Where(predicate);
await Task.Run(() => { _dbSet.RemoveRange(query.AsNoTracking()); });
}
This is my KulturManager:
public async Task<IResult> HardDeleteRangeAsync(int[] ids)
{
await UnitOfWork.Kulturs.DeleteRangeAsync(c => ids.Contains(c.Id));
await UnitOfWork.SaveAsync();
return new Result(ResultStatus.Success, Messages.Info("Kultur", "HardDelete"));
}
And this is my KulturController:
[HttpDelete("{ids}")]
public async Task<IActionResult> HardDeleteRangeAsync(int[] ids)
{
var result = await _kulturManager.HardDeleteRangeAsync(ids);
return Ok(result.Message);
}
Thank you for help
You shouldn't fetch all the entities you want to delete. Instead create stub entities for RemoveRange. If you don't have a common base class, this requires reflection, but with a common entity base class you can do it like this:
public void DeleteRange<T>(int[] ids) where T: BaseEntity, new()
{
_dbSet.RemoveRange(ids.Select(i => new T() { Id = i }).ToList());
}
or if the method is in a generic class, the method would look like
public void DeleteRange(int[] ids)
{
_dbSet.RemoveRange(ids.Select(i => new T() { Id = i }).ToList());
}
And there's no reason to mark this as Async now since it doesn't do any database access.

AspNet Boilerplate Parallel DB Access through Entity Framework from an AppService

We are using ASP.NET Zero and are running into issues with parallel processing from an AppService. We know requests must be transactional, but unfortunately we need to break out to slow running APIs for numerous calls, so we have to do parallel processing.
As expected, we are running into a DbContext contingency issue on the second database call we make:
System.InvalidOperationException: A second operation started on this context
before a previous operation completed. This is usually caused by different
threads using the same instance of DbContext, however instance members are
not guaranteed to be thread safe. This could also be caused by a nested query
being evaluated on the client, if this is the case rewrite the query avoiding
nested invocations.
We read that a new UOW is required, so we tried using both the method attribute and the explicit UowManager, but neither of the two worked.
We also tried creating instances of the referenced AppServices using the IocResolver, but we are still not able to get a unique DbContext per thread (please see below).
public List<InvoiceDto> CreateInvoices(List<InvoiceTemplateLineItemDto> templateLineItems)
{
List<InvoiceDto> invoices = new InvoiceDto[templateLineItems.Count].ToList();
ConcurrentQueue<Exception> exceptions = new ConcurrentQueue<Exception>();
Parallel.ForEach(templateLineItems, async (templateLineItem) =>
{
try
{
XAppService xAppService = _iocResolver.Resolve<XAppService>();
InvoiceDto invoice = await xAppService
.CreateInvoiceInvoiceItem();
invoices.Insert(templateLineItems.IndexOf(templateLineItem), invoice);
}
catch (Exception e)
{
exceptions.Enqueue(e);
}
});
if (exceptions.Count > 0) throw new AggregateException(exceptions);
return invoices;
}
How can we ensure that a new DbContext is availble per thread?
I was able to replicate and resolve the problem with a generic version of ABP. I'm still experiencing the problem in my original solution, which is far more complex. I'll have to do some more digging to determine why it is failing there.
For others that come across this problem, which is exactly the same issue as reference here, you can simply disable the UnitOfWork through an attribute as illustrated in the code below.
public class InvoiceAppService : ApplicationService
{
private readonly InvoiceItemAppService _invoiceItemAppService;
public InvoiceAppService(InvoiceItemAppService invoiceItemAppService)
{
_invoiceItemAppService = invoiceItemAppService;
}
// Just add this attribute
[UnitOfWork(IsDisabled = true)]
public InvoiceDto GetInvoice(List<int> invoiceItemIds)
{
_invoiceItemAppService.Initialize();
ConcurrentQueue<InvoiceItemDto> invoiceItems =
new ConcurrentQueue<InvoiceItemDto>();
ConcurrentQueue<Exception> exceptions = new ConcurrentQueue<Exception>();
Parallel.ForEach(invoiceItemIds, (invoiceItemId) =>
{
try
{
InvoiceItemDto invoiceItemDto =
_invoiceItemAppService.CreateAsync(invoiceItemId).Result;
invoiceItems.Enqueue(invoiceItemDto);
}
catch (Exception e)
{
exceptions.Enqueue(e);
}
});
if (exceptions.Count > 0) {
AggregateException ex = new AggregateException(exceptions);
Logger.Error("Unable to get invoice", ex);
throw ex;
}
return new InvoiceDto {
Date = DateTime.Now,
InvoiceItems = invoiceItems.ToArray()
};
}
}
public class InvoiceItemAppService : ApplicationService
{
private readonly IRepository<InvoiceItem> _invoiceItemRepository;
private readonly IRepository<Token> _tokenRepository;
private readonly IRepository<Credential> _credentialRepository;
private Token _token;
private Credential _credential;
public InvoiceItemAppService(IRepository<InvoiceItem> invoiceItemRepository,
IRepository<Token> tokenRepository,
IRepository<Credential> credentialRepository)
{
_invoiceItemRepository = invoiceItemRepository;
_tokenRepository = tokenRepository;
_credentialRepository = credentialRepository;
}
public void Initialize()
{
_token = _tokenRepository.FirstOrDefault(x => x.Id == 1);
_credential = _credentialRepository.FirstOrDefault(x => x.Id == 1);
}
// Create an invoice item using info from an external API and some db records
public async Task<InvoiceItemDto> CreateAsync(int id)
{
// Get db record
InvoiceItem invoiceItem = await _invoiceItemRepository.GetAsync(id);
// Get price
decimal price = await GetPriceAsync(invoiceItem.Description);
return new InvoiceItemDto {
Id = id,
Description = invoiceItem.Description,
Amount = price
};
}
private async Task<decimal> GetPriceAsync(string description)
{
// Simulate a slow API call to get price using description
// We use the token and credentials here in the real deal
await Task.Delay(5000);
return 100.00M;
}
}

How to ensure proxies are created when using the repository pattern with entity framework?

I have this method in my SurveyController class:
public ActionResult AddProperties(int id, int[] propertyids, int page = 1)
{
var survey = _uow.SurveyRepository.Find(id);
if (propertyids == null)
return GetPropertiesTable(survey, page);
var repo = _uow.PropertySurveyRepository;
propertyids.Select(propertyid => new PropertySurvey
{
//Setting the Property rather than the PropertyID
//prevents the error occurring later
//Property = _uow.PropertyRepository.Find(propertyid),
PropertyID = propertyid,
SurveyID = id
})
.ForEach(x => repo.InsertOrUpdate(x));
_uow.Save();
return GetPropertiesTable(survey, page);
}
The GetPropertiesTable redisplays Properties but PropertySurvey.Property is marked virtual and I have created the entity using the new operator, so a proxy to support lazy loading was never created and it is null when I access it. When we have access direct to the DbContext we can use the Create method to explicitly create the proxy. But I have a unit of work and repository pattern here. I guess I could expose the context.Create method via a repository.Create method and then I need to remember to use that instead of the new operator when I add an entity . But wouldn't it be better to encapsulate the problem in my InsertOrUpdate method? Is there some way to detect that the entity being added is not a proxy when it should be and substitute a proxy? This is my InsertOrUpdate method in my base repository class:
protected virtual void InsertOrUpdate(T e, int id)
{
if (id == default(int))
{
// New entity
context.Set<T>().Add(e);
}
else
{
// Existing entity
context.Entry(e).State = EntityState.Modified;
}
}
Based on the answer supplied by qujck. Here is how you can do it without having to employ automapper:
Edited to always check for proxy - not just during insert - as suggested in comments
Edited again to use a different way of checking whether a proxy was passed in to the method. The reason for changing the technique is that I ran into a problem when I introduced an entity that inherited from another. In that case an inherited entity can fail the entity.e.GetType().Equals(instance.GetType() check even if it is a proxy. I got the new technique from this answer
public virtual T InsertOrUpdate(T e)
{
DbSet<T> dbSet = Context.Set<T>();
DbEntityEntry<T> entry;
if (e.GetType().BaseType != null
&& e.GetType().Namespace == "System.Data.Entity.DynamicProxies")
{
//The entity being added is already a proxy type that supports lazy
//loading - just get the context entry
entry = Context.Entry(e);
}
else
{
//The entity being added has been created using the "new" operator.
//Generate a proxy type to support lazy loading and attach it
T instance = dbSet.Create();
instance.ID = e.ID;
entry = Context.Entry(instance);
dbSet.Attach(instance);
//and set it's values to those of the entity
entry.CurrentValues.SetValues(e);
e = instance;
}
entry.State = e.ID == default(int) ?
EntityState.Added :
EntityState.Modified;
return e;
}
public abstract class ModelBase
{
public int ID { get; set; }
}
I agree with you that this should be handled in one place and the best place to catch all looks to be your repository. You can compare the type of T with an instance created by the context and use something like Automapper to quickly transfer all of the values if the types do not match.
private bool mapCreated = false;
protected virtual void InsertOrUpdate(T e, int id)
{
T instance = context.Set<T>().Create();
if (e.GetType().Equals(instance.GetType()))
instance = e;
else
{
//this bit should really be managed somewhere else
if (!mapCreated)
{
Mapper.CreateMap(e.GetType(), instance.GetType());
mapCreated = true;
}
instance = Mapper.Map(e, instance);
}
if (id == default(int))
context.Set<T>().Add(instance);
else
context.Entry(instance).State = EntityState.Modified;
}

ApplyCurrentValues does not seem to work

I try to do the following with entity framework 4 :
public void Update(Site entity)
{
using (db)
{
db.Sites.Attach(db.Sites.Single(s => s.Id == entity.Id));
db.Sites.ApplyCurrentValues(entity);
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
But when i try to update a site through this method i get an error telling me that :
The conversion of a datetime2 data
type to a datetime data type resulted
in an out-of-range value. The
statement has been terminated.
And this is because the original site for some reason is not loaded through the Attach() method.
Can someone help with this ?
/Martin
You don't need to "attach" something you are already retrieving (Ladislav is right). Once you retrieve an entity (e.g SingleOrDefault), it is "in the graph" (EF memory - so it can do optimistic concurrency).
If your trying to do an UPDATE< and the "entity" your passing through is new/detached...
Try the stub technique:
public void Update(Site entity)
{
using (db)
{
var stub = new Site { Id = entity.Id }; // create stub with given key
db.Sites.Attach(stub); // stub is now in graph
db.Sites.ApplyCurrentValues(entity); // override graph (stub) with entity
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
That being said, the error you have provided points to some other issue (data conversion).
Have you checked the "date" values you are passing through with the data type on the model?
public ActionResult Edit(int id, Client collection)
{
try
{
// make sure the rec is in the context
var rec = dbEntities.Clients.First(r => r.ClientID == id);
// update the rec in the context with the parm values
dbEntities.Clients.ApplyCurrentValues(collection);
// make the changes permanent
dbEntities.SaveChanges();
return RedirectToAction("Index");
}
catch
{
return View();
}
}