I have a small project with inherited C# code, specifically Entity Framework Core. This is hosted in Azure and recently I saw a very interesting feature that I would like to try out: "Automatic Tuning" for the database.
I have a couple of questions regarding this:
Would it conflict with my Entity Framework, as the database objects were originally created from code? My understanding is that it shouldn't, but I would like to be sure.
Is it worth it or anyone had any trouble with it?
Thanks!
Automatic Tuning does not get in conflict in any way with Entity Framework (EF). It just create indexes needed by queries in use on your application. It also drops duplicated and unneeded indexes (but existent unique indexes are not dropped) and chooses the best query plan created by SQL Server. None of these are related to EF.
One thing you need to consider is that Azure SQL Database needs to monitor query activities at least for a day in order to identify some recommendations.
Another thing to take in consideration is that Automatic Tuning does not update statistics and does not defrag indexes.
Related
We are involved in quite a new development in which we are remaking our current web shop platform.
In the current platform we do not use EF6 neither other ORM but store procedures to access to the db, but in the new building is what we do.
We have a doubt regarding database design of the new platform. In the current platform we use several different databases depending on the content of them.
For example, we have dedicated databases to store information for products catalogs other dedicated db for handling orders.
Currently all data access is done through stored procedures, so we have no problem with the links between different databases.
The problem appears to us now when we have started to use EF6. In this case each DB is associated with a context and it is not possible to know data from one context to another
unless we implement directly in the source code these relationships using various contexts. It looks like these means we will lose the power of EF6.
The questions we have are:
Is it a bad design maintaining different databases for the same application using EF6?
in case this is a poor design and choosing for a single database, is the performance going to be optimum even driving hundreds of tables (almost 1000) with several TBytes of information?
in the other hand, in the case of opting for the design in which several bbdd appear (it would be much better in our case), what is the best way to handle them EF6?
Thank you very much for your help!
First of all EF is not written to be cross database. You can't write cross database (cross context) queries, lazy load does not work and so on.
This is a big limitation in your case.
EF could work with several schema (actually I don't use it and I don't like it but is just my opinion).
You can use your stored procedures with EF but as I understand you are thinking to stop to use them.
In my experience I wrote several applications with more than one database but the use of the different databases was very limited. In this cases I use cross database views (i.e. one database per company and some common tables with views in company databases that selects data in common tables). In your case, if the tables are sharded everywhere I don't think this is a way you can choose.
So, in my opinion you could change the approach.
If you have backups problems you could shard the huge tables (I think facts tables and tables with pictures) and create cross database views. BTW, also, cross database referential integrity is not supported in SQL Server so you need to write triggers to check it.
If you need to split different application functions (i.e. WMS, CRM and so on) you can use namespaces without bothering about how tables are stored in the DB.
I am a DBA. I want to know what advantages my Business Objects developers will get when using EF with SQL Server DB which is fully managed using Foreign keys and Primarkey as and when require. As this is our new project and we have to use EF with SQL Server 2008 R2. We have a plan to use Database First Approach. Can anyone tell me what difference my Business Object developer will experience in case If I define all foreign Key relationships in my DB?
Assuming it's setup correctly, when your developers actually create their objects from the database structure, they'll be able to access any related tables rather easily.
It should also make creation of new objects (rows in the tables) easy, as it then shouldn't be possible to create new items that would break the foreign key relationship.
It's also just plain good practice to correctly setup any foreign keys in the database; I'm not sure of any benefit not to.
As a developer that's had to work with data sources that haven't been setup correctly, I can tell you a correctly setup database structure is an amazing experience for a developer.
(As an aside, as a DBA, you may want to take a look at EF. Also take a look at LINQ, one of the items that they'll be using. In particular, Why LINQ beats SQL may help you get a basic understanding, even if you don't agree with the article title :) )
I am using Self Tracking Entities with the Entity Framework 4. I have 2 databases, with the exact same schema. However, tables in one database will be added to/edited etc (and I mean data will be added/edited, not the actual table definitions) and at certain points of the day I will need to synchronize all the changes between this database and the other database.
I can create a separate context for both of them. But if I read a large graph from one database, how can I update the other database with the graph? Is there an easy way?
My database model is large and complex and fully relational. So it would be a big job to go through every single entity and do a read from the other database to see if it exists or not, update/insert it if need be, and then carry this on through the full object graph!
Any ideas?
This is not a use case for EF. In EF you will have to do exactly what you've described. Self tracking entities are able to track changes to these object instances - they know nothing about changes made to their own database over time and they will not know anything about state of your second database as well.
Try to look at SQL server native features (including mirroring, transaction log shipping or SSIS) and MS Sync framework. Depending on your detailed requirements these tools can suite you better.
I am starting with the Entity Framework. It sounds great. But I am wondering if I should watch out for some weakness somewhere. Any experience there?
You probably need to start prefixing these questions with the version you are talking about. A good amount of the annoyances have been fixed in the upcoming version in .NET 4.0.
Here is what I would say after working with the first version for about 6 months using a decent size DB in sql 2k8(40+ tables, several tables with close to 1M rows, and decent amount of traffic)
Lack of Foreign key properties. Meaning if I want to know or work with just the id of a related table I have to load the actual entity. (fixed in next version)
Utter lack of an easy outer join like linq to sql has when using DefaultIfEmpty. Fixed in next version.
Generated Sql is less than optimal This seems to be fixed in next version as well
Very difficult to abstract from your code for testability and for use in multi tiered environments, but it can be done. This can also be classified as the POCO problem that also has been resolved.
There are more, but these are my top ones.
Overall I would use it again, but if you are starting from scratch please save yourself some pain and wait for the latest version or start using the beta if you can.
You might find the walkthroughs for Entity Framework 4.0 useful. All of the new features discussed are annoying emissions from the currently released version for someone.
I found the new TDD/testability features and T4 code generation features especially interesting.
About EF1:
Generated SQL is horrible. It multiples joins, it is 10x bigger than it could. I had a simple query, but with a lot of joins and generating this query by EF (not executing) was slowing down significantly my application. No, I couldn't use precompiled query. I used view to cope with it. SQL Profiler was helpful.
Primary keys in views are not recognized properly. You have to change edmx file by hand when you import view or doing schema refresh.
You can design entities from database in graphical manner, update model from database, but it doesn't always work good, specially when you change field types or foreign keys.
You can't update one table in model, always have to update whole model from db.
You can't define base class for your entities, it is already defined (EntityObject). You can use interfaces, because classes are defined as partial.
No POCO, entity classes are strongly connected to framework.
You can set foreign key by EntityReference.EntityKey, but when you have EntityCollection, prepare for round trip to db. Or am I missing something?
I am finding the POCO objects and model-first design in the EF4 beta very sexy.
I am using Entity Framework to layer on my SQL Server 2008 database. The EF is present in my web service and the webservice is invoked by a Silverlight client.
I am seeing a serious performance issue in terms of the duration taken by a query to execute in the EF. This wouldn't happen in the consecutive calls.
A little bit of googling revealed that, it's caused per app domain to construct the in-memory model of the db objects. I found this Microsoft link explaining pre-generation of views for performance improvement. Even after implementing the steps, the performance actually degraded instead of improving. I am curious, if anyone has tried this approach successfully and if there are any other avenues for improving performance.
I am using .NET 3.5.
A couple areas to look at for EF performance
Do as much of the processing before calling things like tolist(). ToList will bring everything in the set into memory. By default, EF will keep building the expression tree and only actually process it when you need the data in memory. That first query will be against the database, but afterwards the processing will be in memory. When working with large data, you definitely want as much of the heavy lifting done by the database as possible.
EF 1 only has the option to pull the entire row back. Therefore if you have a column that is a large string or binary blob, it is going to be pulled down and into memory whether you need it or not. You can create a projection that doesn't include this column, but then you don't get the benefits of having it be an entity.
You can look at the sql generated by EF using the suggestion in this post
How do I view the SQL generated by the Entity Framework?
The same laws of physics apply for EF queries as they do for ordinary SQL. Check your database tables and make sure that you have indexes on primary and foreign keys, that your database is properly normalized, and so forth. If performance is degrading after Microsoft's suggestions, then that's my guess as to the problem area.
Are you hosting the webservice in IIS? Is it running on the same site as the Silverlight App? What about the database itself? Is it running on a dedicated machine? Are there other apps hitting it? The first call to a dormant database is painful (I've had situations where it would actually time out in my environment.)
There are a number of factors to take into consideration here. But it comes down to more than just EF's overhead.
edit I didn't fully qualify but the process of opening the first connection to SQL Server is slow regardless of your data access solution.
Use SQL Profiler to check how many queries executed to retrieve your data.If it's large number use Include() method of ObjectQuery to retrieve child objects with parent in one query.