I am using Entity Framework 6 Code First for my project.
Entities have Inheritance so I am following TPH(Table per Hierarchy).
I read following Article and many others.
None of them explain a way in which I can use an existing DB Column mapped to a property in Base Entity as Discriminator.
Based on the sample below I get following Exception
One or more validation errors were detected during model generation:
TaskType: Name: Each property name in a type must be unique. Property name 'TaskType' is already defined.
I think EF's auto generated Discriminator and my Entities Mapping is Conflicting.
Is there a possible way to instruct EF to not auto generate column and use Entity mapped Column.
If not, is there any explanation of this can not be avoided.
Peace.
I have Entities in following format
public enum TaskType
{
Random = 0,
Polished = 1,
Dropping = 2
}
public interface ITask
{
int Id { get; set; }
string Name { get; set; }
TaskType typeofTask { get; set; }
}
public abstract class BaseTask : ITask
{
public BaseTask(string name, TaskType type)
{
this.Name = Name;
this.typeofTask = type;
}
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public TaskType typeofTask { get; set; }
}
public class RandomTask : BaseTask
{
public RandomTask() : base("My Random", TaskType.Random)
{
}
public int Owner { get; set; }
}
public class PolishedTask : BaseTask
{
public PolishedTask() : base("My Polished", TaskType.Polished)
{
}
}
public class DBContextTest : DbContext
{
public DBContextTest(string connection) : base(connection)
{
}
public DbSet<BaseTask> Task { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<BaseTask>().Map<RandomTask>(m => m.Requires("TaskType").HasValue(1))
.Map<PolishedTask>(m => m.Requires("TaskType").HasValue(1));
modelBuilder.Entity<BaseTask>().Property(p => p.typeofTask).HasColumnName("TaskType");
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
try
{
DBContextTest dataContext = new DBContextTest("Server = (localdb)\\mssqllocaldb;DataBase = LOC2;Trusted_Connection = True;");
RandomTask randomtask = new RandomTask();
PolishedTask polishedTask = new PolishedTask();
dataContext.Task.Add(randomtask);
dataContext.Task.Add(polishedTask);
dataContext.SaveChanges();
}
catch (System.Exception ex)
{
}
}
}
Remove TaskType from your entity and let EF manage that as part of the TPH mapping. To differentiate types if you're dealing with a base-class collection, use .OfType<PolishedTask>() rather than .Where(x => x.TaskType == TaskType.Polished) EF should take care of the rest. If you do want it on the entity, create a non-mapped property in your sub-classes.
I.e.
public abstract class BaseTask
{
[NotMapped]
public abstract TaskType TaskType { get; }
}
public class PolishedTask
{
[NotMapped]
public override TaskType TaskType => TaskType.Polished
// or
//public override TaskType TaskType
//{
// get { return TaskType.Polished; }
//}
}
Related
I have a header-child tables with the child having different types but stored in the same table (TPH).
On top of this, user can snapshot a copy of a header and its children records and I would like to store the snapped copy into a different table since these snapshot records would be less frequent to view/modify.
To achieve this, I am mixing TPC to my existing TPH.
The new structure is as follows:
public class Header
{
private IList<Child> _childs = new List<Child>();
private IList<ChildSnapshot> _childSnapshots = new List<ChildSnapshot>();
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public IList<Child> Childs { get { return _childs; } }
public IList<ChildSnapshot> ChildSnapshots { get { return _childSnapshots; } }
}
public abstract class ChildBase
{
[Key]
[DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.None)]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Header")]
public int HeaderId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("HeaderId")]
public virtual Header Header { get; set; }
}
public abstract class Child : ChildBase
{
}
public class Child1 : Child
{
}
public class Child2 : Child
{
}
public abstract class ChildSnapshot : ChildBase
{
}
public class ChildSnapshot1 : ChildSnapshot
{
}
public class ChildSnapshot2 : ChildSnapshot
{
}
And the database context:
public class TestContext : DbContext
{
public DbSet<Header> Headers { get; set; }
public DbSet<Child> Childs { get; set; }
public DbSet<ChildSnapshot> ChildSnapshots { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
modelBuilder.Entity<Header>().Map(m => m.ToTable("Header"));
modelBuilder.Entity<Child>()
.Map<Child>(m =>
{
m.MapInheritedProperties();
m.ToTable("Child");
})
.Map<Child1>(m =>
{
m.Requires("Discriminator").HasValue("Child1");
})
.Map<Child2>(m =>
{
m.Requires("Discriminator").HasValue("Child2");
});
modelBuilder.Entity<ChildSnapshot>()
.Map<ChildSnapshot>(m =>
{
m.MapInheritedProperties();
m.ToTable("ChildSnapshot");
})
.Map<ChildSnapshot1>(m =>
{
m.Requires("Discriminator").HasValue("Child1");
})
.Map<ChildSnapshot2>(m =>
{
m.Requires("Discriminator").HasValue("Child2");
});
}
}
It works perfectly after many trials and errors. However, I've got to create 2 list properties in Header class. Is it possible to have only 1 list property of ChildBase type? I got the following error when I do so.
The type 'Child' cannot be mapped as defined because it maps inherited
properties from types that use entity splitting or another form of
inheritance. Either choose a different inheritance mapping strategy so
as to not map inherited properties, or change all types in the
hierarchy to map inherited properties and to not use splitting.
Why is the behaviour determined by the type of the container list? Can't EF infer from the type of the object in the list instead?
FYI I am using EF 4.3.
I want to remove a row in database and insert it again with the same Id, It sounds ridiculous, but here is the scenario:
The domain classes are as follows:
public class SomeClass
{
public int SomeClassId { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual Behavior Behavior { get; set; }
}
public abstract class Behavior
{
public int BehaviorId { get; set; }
}
public class BehaviorA : Behavior
{
public string BehaviorASpecific { get; set; }
}
public class BehaviorB : Behavior
{
public string BehaviorBSpecific { get; set; }
}
The entity context is
public class TestContext : DbContext
{
public DbSet<SomeClass> SomeClasses { get; set; }
public DbSet<Behavior> Behaviors { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<OneToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
modelBuilder.Entity<SomeClass>()
.HasOptional(s => s.Behavior)
.WithRequired()
.WillCascadeOnDelete(true);
}
}
Now this code can be executed to demonstrate the point
(described with comments in the code below)
using(TestContext db = new TestContext())
{
var someClass = new SomeClass() { Name = "A" };
someClass.Behavior = new BehaviorA() { BehaviorASpecific = "Behavior A" };
db.SomeClasses.Add(someClass);
// Here I have two classes with the state of added which make sense
var modifiedEntities = db.ChangeTracker.Entries()
.Where(entity => entity.State != System.Data.Entity.EntityState.Unchanged).ToList();
// They save with no problem
db.SaveChanges();
// Now I want to change the behavior and it causes entity to try to remove the behavior and add it again
someClass.Behavior = new BehaviorB() { BehaviorBSpecific = "Behavior B" };
// Here it can be seen that we have a behavior A with the state of deleted and
// behavior B with the state of added
modifiedEntities = db.ChangeTracker.Entries()
.Where(entity => entity.State != System.Data.Entity.EntityState.Unchanged).ToList();
// But in reality when entity sends the query to the database it replaces the
// remove and insert with an update query (this can be seen in the SQL Profiler)
// which causes the discrimenator to remain the same where it should change.
db.SaveChanges();
}
How to change this entity behavior so that delete and insert happens instead of the update?
A possible solution is to make the changes in 2 different steps: before someClass.Behavior = new BehaviorB() { BehaviorBSpecific = "Behavior B" }; insert
someClass.Behaviour = null;
db.SaveChanges();
The behaviour is related to the database model. BehaviourA and B in EF are related to the same EntityRecordInfo and has the same EntitySet (Behaviors).
You have the same behaviour also if you create 2 different DbSets on the context because the DB model remains the same.
EDIT
Another way to achieve a similar result of 1-1 relationship is using ComplexType. They works also with inheritance.
Here an example
public class TestContext : DbContext
{
public TestContext(DbConnection connection) : base(connection, true) { }
public DbSet<Friend> Friends { get; set; }
public DbSet<LessThanFriend> LessThanFriends { get; set; }
}
public class Friend
{
public Friend()
{Address = new FullAddress();}
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public FullAddress Address { get; set; }
}
public class LessThanFriend
{
public LessThanFriend()
{Address = new CityAddress();}
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public CityAddress Address { get; set; }
}
[ComplexType]
public class CityAddress
{
public string Cap { get; set; }
public string City { get; set; }
}
[ComplexType]
public class FullAddress : CityAddress
{
public string Street { get; set; }
}
I am using Entity Framework Code First method to create my database table. The following code creates a DATETIME column in the database, but I want to create a DATE column.
//[Column(TypeName = "Date")]
public DateTime endDate { get; set; }
public DateTime startDate { get; set; }
The Column Attribute is not working.How can I create a column of type DATE, during table creation?
Thanks!
You can map your entities to your tables in the DbContext in the OnModelCreating method. Personally I prefer to create a mapping class per entity and reference it within this method. Example:
EDIT - Updated Code. This is fully functional code.
public sealed class MyDb : DbContext
{
static MyDb()
{
System.Data.Entity.Database.SetInitializer<MyDb>(new DropCreateDatabaseAlways<MyDb>());
}
public MyDb(string nameOrConnectionString) : base(nameOrConnectionString)
{
}
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Configurations.Add(new MyMapper());
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
public DbSet<TesTme> Items { get; set; }
}
public sealed class MyMapper : EntityTypeConfiguration<TesTme>
{
public MyMapper()
{
// other mapping info
this.ToTable("TestTable");
HasKey(x => x.MyId);
this.Property(x => x.MyId).HasDatabaseGeneratedOption(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity);
Property(x => x.dt).HasColumnType("date");
}
}
public sealed class TesTme
{
public int MyId { get; set; }
public DateTime dt { get; set; }
}
public sealed class SomeCallerOfTheDbContext
{
public void TestMe()
{
// this is the entry point
using (var context = new MyDb("connectionStringName"))
{
var items = context.Items.ToList();
}
}
}
please look at the code below.
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
using (myContext context = new myContext())
{
Team t = new Team();
t.id = 1;
t.Name = "asd";
context.teamSet.Add(t);
context.SaveChanges();
}
}
}
public abstract class Base
{
public virtual int id { get; set; }
}
public abstract class Player : Base
{
public virtual string Name { get; set; }
public virtual int Number { get; set; }
public virtual Team team { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("team")]
public int teamId { get; set; }
}
public class Team : Base
{
public ICollection<Player> Players { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
public class FootballPlayer : Player
{
public double Speed { get; set; }
}
public class BasketballPlayer : Player
{
public double Height { get; set; }
public double Speed { get; set; }
}
public class myContext : DbContext
{
public DbSet<Player> playerSet { get; set; }
public DbSet<Team> teamSet { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Configurations.Add(new BaseConfiguration()).Add(new PlayerConfiguration()).Add(new TeamConfiguration()).Add(new FootballConfiguration()).Add(new BasketballConfiguration());
}
}
public class BaseConfiguration : EntityTypeConfiguration<Base>
{
public BaseConfiguration()
{
HasKey(k => k.id);
Property(p => p.id).IsRequired().HasDatabaseGeneratedOption(DatabaseGeneratedOption.None);
}
}
public class PlayerConfiguration : EntityTypeConfiguration<Player>
{
public PlayerConfiguration()
{
Map(p=>{
p.MapInheritedProperties();
p.ToTable("Player");
});
}
}
public class TeamConfiguration : EntityTypeConfiguration<Team>
{
public TeamConfiguration()
{
Map(p =>
{
p.MapInheritedProperties();
p.ToTable("Team");
});
}
}
public class FootballConfiguration : EntityTypeConfiguration<FootballPlayer>
{
public FootballConfiguration()
{
ToTable("FootballPlayer");
}
}
public class BasketballConfiguration : EntityTypeConfiguration<BasketballPlayer>
{
public BasketballConfiguration()
{
ToTable("BasketballPlayer");
}
}
My Player class and Team Class are derived from Based Class, and FootballPlayer and BasketballPlayer are derived from Player. But in the generated database, Player table doesn't contain a FK teamId, it is only a common property. Furthermore, the FootballPlayer and BasketballPlayer tables don't contains the properties which derived from Player class. Anyone can help?
What inheritance mapping are you trying to achieve? At the moment you have TPC between Base and Player and TPT between Player and its derived types. If you want to have inherited properties in those derived types you must use TPC as well but in such case there should be no Player table in your database. To use TPC for player you must use MapInheritedProperties in their mapping configurations.
Using Model-first and Table-per-heirachy, I can create two classes that inherit from the same base class, and map a column in each of the two derived classes to the same table column so that I can 're-use' columns.
If I try that with Code-first, I get the following error: "Each property name in a type must be unique. Property name 'XXX' was already defined."
I assume that this is a bug in code-first?
Here is some example code:
public class Parent
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
}
public class ChildA : Parent
{
public Int32 ChildAProperty { get; set; }
}
public class ChildB : Parent
{
public Int32 ChildBProperty { get; set; }
}
public class TestContext : DbContext
{
public DbSet<Parent> Entities { get { return this.Set<Parent>(); } }
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
var childAConfig = modelBuilder.Entity<ChildA>();
childAConfig.Property(p => p.ChildAProperty).HasColumnName("Property");
var childBConfig = modelBuilder.Entity<ChildB>();
childBConfig.Property(p => p.ChildBProperty).HasColumnName("Property");
}
}