I am trying to update two tables Situation and SituationCategory, but it is not updating as mentioned in below code and image.
public async Task<bool> UpdateSituation(int id, SituationsDto data)
{
Situations result = _mapper.Map<SituationsDto, Situations>(data);
result.Deleted = true;
_context.Entry(result).State = EntityState.Modified;
await _context.SaveChangesAsync();
SituationCategories situationCategory = new SituationCategories();
if (result.SituationCategory != null)
{
if (situationCategory != null)
{
situationCategory.Description = result.SituationCategory.Description;
}
}
await _context.SaveChangesAsync();
}
In this screenshot, I have highlighted the data which should be updated:
Please answer
An EF context knows nothing about objects unless you attach a given object to a context, or, you initially retrieved an object from a context.
Instead of just marking the entity as modified:
_context.Entry(result).State = EntityState.Modified;
You'll need to call Update(), which, begins tracking the entity & marks it as modified, so, when you call SaveChanges(), changes will be written to DB:
_context.Update(result);
PS. I would only call SaveChanges() once, in this case, at the end of your method.
Related
I have a problem with EF Core 5 that is really getting me down.
FYI, LazyLoadingProxies are used (something else that just gives me a headache, but well, different topic).
Information for the code below:
Service: A service per entity, contains all CRUD operations into the database and other methods if needed.
Workflow: Uses multiple services at once to perform certain operations (e.g. create product -> create product folder -> save product).
Problem:
I have an entity "Product" which contains the following update method which is used to update the properties of the entity with those of another object:
public override void Update(Product source)
{
// Properties
AnnualPrice = source.AnnualPrice;
...
// Relations
var sourceRelatedProductIds = source.RelatedWithProductIds.Where(x => x != Id);
if (sourceRelatedProductIds.Count() != 0)
{
RelatedWithProducts.Clear();
foreach (var relatedWithProduct in ctx.Set<Product>().Where(x => source.RelatedWithProductIds.Contains(x.Id)).AsNoTracking())
{
RelatedWithProducts.Add(relatedWithProduct);
}
}
var oldShortDescriptions = ShortDescriptions.ToList(); <--- EXCEPTION
ShortDescriptions.Clear();
foreach (var shortDescription in source.ShortDescriptions)
{
shortDescription.Id = oldShortDescriptions.FirstOrDefault(x => x.Culture == shortDescription.Culture)?.Id ?? 0;
ShortDescriptions.Add(shortDescription);
}
...
}
In the line with the arrow and "Exception", I get the following exception:
System.InvalidOperationException: 'The instance of entity type 'Product' cannot be tracked because another instance with the key value '{Id: 1}' is already being tracked. When attaching existing entities, ensure that only one entity instance with a given key value is attached.'
In itself, I understand what the exception is trying to tell me. My problem is that I can't find the reason for it anywhere. Because as far as I can tell, the product with ID 1 can't be tracked yet.
Of course, the problem is not in the update method, but before it, so here is the rest of the code.
ProductController.Update:
[HttpPut("update")]
public IActionResult Update(C.Product[] products)
{
if (!ModelState.IsValid)
{
return UnprocessableEntity(ModelState.Values.SelectMany(x => x.Errors));
}
var dbProducts = products.Select(ToDatabase).ToArray(); <--- Just converts the given client model into a Database model
var result = productWorkflow.Update(dbProducts); <--- Calls a workflow class, NOT the update method of the entity
return CoreToActionResultConverter.ToActionResult<Db.Product>(result);
}
ProductWorkflow.Update:
public ResultBase Update(params Product[] products)
{
var result = productService.AddOrUpdate(products); <--- This calls the Service CRUD AddOrUpdate method
if (result is not ServiceResult<Product>)
{
return result;
}
return new ServiceResult<Product>(ResultType.AddedOrUpdated);
}
ProductService.AddOrUpdate:
public virtual ResultBase AddOrUpdate(IEnumerable<TEntity> entities)
{
var currentEntities = new List<TEntity>();
foreach (var entity in entities)
{
var currentEntity = Get(entity.Id); <--- This line is the only one where I could imagine that it is already tracked here. The problem is only that it does not work ONLY with the workflow. If I call my AddOrUpdate method from the controller, which directly calls THIS method, it works (although this line is just executed the same way).
if (currentEntity == null)
{
currentEntity = Ctx.CreateProxy<TEntity>();
Ctx.Attach(currentEntity);
}
if (currentEntity != entity)
{
currentEntity.Update(entity);
}
currentEntities.Add(currentEntity);
}
Ctx.AddRange(currentEntities.Where(x => x.Id == 0));
Ctx.UpdateRange(currentEntities.Where(x => x.Id != 0));
try
{
Ctx.SaveChanges();
}
catch (DbUpdateException ex)
{
// Commented out the error handling to remove unnecessary things for the post
}
return new ServiceResult<TEntity>(ServiceResult.ResultType.AddedOrUpdated, currentEntities);
}
I found the problem and it was not on the line where the exception was thrown, but before.
In my Product.Update() method (the first code snippet), I get the Related Products by ID and add them to the list (Simply a Many to Many relationship, from Product <--> Product). When calling Update, I specified ID 1 in the RelatedProductIds, however the entity itself also has ID 1, so it references itself. I have now just fixed that by omitting the ID, if the same as the object itself.
This still doesn't explain why it works with a breakpoint, because it's still tracked in that case (or not tracked, since I'm using AsNoTracking(), but good).
I simply try to update an entity with method ProjeleriGuncelle below.
When I try to access the original values of the object in an overridden SaveChangesAsync with EntityEntry.OriginalValues.ToObject(), I see that the object contains the current values instead of the old ones.
Am I missing something? I expect clonedTypedEntity to have the values before update.
public async Task<ActionResult<int>> ProjeleriGuncelle(Proje proje)
{
var projeFound = DataContext.Projeler.AsNoTracking().FirstOrDefault(p => p.EntegrasyonId == proje.EntegrasyonId);
var entry = DataContext.Entry<Proje>(projeFound);
//Database entry is updated with the proje object as expected
entry.CurrentValues.SetValues(proje);
entry.State = EntityState.Modified;
await DataContext.SaveChangesAsync();
}
public override Task<int> SaveChangesAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken = new CancellationToken())
{
ChangeTracker.DetectChanges();
var modifiedEntries = this.ChangeTracker.Entries();
foreach (var modifiedEntry in modifiedEntries)
{
//modifiedEntry.OriginalValues.ToObject() returns the object with the currrent values instead of the original values before update
if (modifiedEntry.OriginalValues.ToObject() is not IVersionable clonedTypedEntity) continue;
clonedTypedEntity.Id = 0;
clonedTypedEntity.UstSurumId = (modifiedEntry.Entity as IVersionable)?.Id;
Add(clonedTypedEntity);
}
return base.SaveChangesAsync(cancellationToken);
}
Update :
When I remove AsNoTracking() when querying for projeFound, modifiedEntry.OriginalValues.ToObject() really returns values before update. But I don't understand the behaviour, because with var entry = DataContext.Entry<Proje>(projeFound); statement, I expect that entry object is tracked, and by updating it with entry.CurrentValues.SetValues(proje); I expect to have access to original values.
For EF the original values are the values when it starts tracking, which is when entry.State = EntityState.Modified; is called. EF is oblivious of the changes that happened in the previous line of code.
You could solve it by swapping both lines:
entry.State = EntityState.Modified; // attaches and stores original values
entry.CurrentValues.SetValues(proje);
An improvement would be to attach the entry and let the change tracker figure out if the entity was really modified.
entry.State = EntityState.Unchanged; // attaches and stores original values
entry.CurrentValues.SetValues(proje);
Now SetValues only marks actually changed properties as modified and the update statement can be much slimmer, or even not happen at all.
I had the same problem in this days....
In my Dbcontext i set this property:
ChangeTracker.QueryTrackingBehavior = QueryTrackingBehavior.NoTracking;
this property disable all tracking and you can not have their OriginalValue.
I have a WebAPI2 Restful services API and I am using SQL Server database with Entity Framework. I have PUT methods like this
/*
* This changes the Study Status.
*/
[HttpPut, Route("ResponseSetStatus/{id:int}")]
public IHttpActionResult UpdateResponseSetStatus(int id, [FromUri] string status = null)
{
var db = new MyContext(MyContext.EntityContextString);
var responseSet = db.ResponseSets.FirstOrDefault(x => x.ResponseSetId == id);
if (responseSet == null)
{
return NotFound();
}
// ADD ONE SECOND DELAY HERE FOR TESTING
Thread.Sleep(1000);
responseSet.Status = status;
db.SaveChanges();
return Ok();
}
I thought this would work! But it fails. One of the columns in the database is a rowVersion (to prevent lost updates). When I call this function from multiple clients I get exception...
An exception of type 'System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DbUpdateConcurrencyException' occurred in EntityFramework.dll but was not handled in user code
because of rowVersion mismatch. Do I really need an explicit transaction for all my update apis? I thought the framework is supposed to do that for me.
Since no one has answered, I will. Yes, WebAPI2 does not wrap the call in a transaction. That would be silly, if you think about it. Also the code
using (var db = new MyContext()) {
// do stuff
}
does not implicitly create a transaction. Therefore, when you implement a RESTFUL PUT method to update your database, you have three options: (1) call db.SaveChanges() one time only and hope for the best, as the OP code, or (2) you can add a rowVersion column, and call db.SaveChanges() with try-catch in a loop, or (3) you can create an explicit transaction.
In my opinion, option 1 is evil, and option 2 is a terrible hack that was invented because transactions did not exist prior to EF6.
The correct way to implement Update:
[HttpPut, Route("ResponseSetStatus/{id:int}")]
public IHttpActionResult UpdateResponseSetStatus(int id, [FromUri] string status = null)
{
using (var db = new MyContext(MyContext.EntityContextString))
{
using (var tran = db.Database.BeginTransaction())
{
var responseSet = db.ResponseSets.FirstOrDefault(x => x.ResponseSetId == id);
if (responseSet == null)
{
return NotFound();
}
// ADD ONE SECOND DELAY HERE FOR TESTING
Thread.Sleep(1000);
responseSet.Status = status;
tran.Commit();
}
}
return Ok();
}
Please note that try-catch is not necessary. If anything fails, the using tran will automatically rollback, and the WebAPI2 will send a nice 500 response to the client.
p.s. i put the db = new MyContext also in using, because it's the right way to do it.
Why is this not updating in the database, but the commented out version does work?
public bool InsertOrUpdateItems(Items item)
{
using (var dbContext = new MyEntities())
{
var items = dbContext.Items.Find(item.ItemId);
if (items != null)
{
dbContext.Items.Attach(items);
dbContext.Entry(items).State = EntityState.Modified;
//dbContext.Entry(items).CurrentValues.SetValues(item);
dbContext.SaveChanges();
}
There are no exceptions being thrown, it just wont update. Even though the record is found.
If the line in question is commented out, there are no new values to update. Notice that you:
Get object named items from DB
You attach it (although it is attached by default)
You try to save the same items
Object that you pass as a parameter for InsertOrUpdateItems method (item) is not even touched in your code, except reading its Id for use with Find()
It seems to me that I have to retrieve an object before I delete it with entity framework like below
var customer = context.Customers.First(c => c.Id == 1);
context.DeleteObject(customer);
context.Savechanges();
So I need to hit database twice. Is there a easier way?
In Entity Framework 6 the delete action is Remove. Here is an example
Customer customer = new Customer () { Id = id };
context.Customers.Attach(customer);
context.Customers.Remove(customer);
context.SaveChanges();
The same as #Nix with a small change to be strongly typed:
If you don't want to query for it just create an entity, and then delete it.
Customer customer = new Customer () { Id = id };
context.Customers.Attach(customer);
context.Customers.DeleteObject(customer);
context.SaveChanges();
Similar question here.
With Entity Framework there is EntityFramework-Plus (extensions library).
Available on NuGet. Then you can write something like:
// DELETE all users which has been inactive for 2 years
ctx.Users.Where(x => x.LastLoginDate < DateTime.Now.AddYears(-2))
.Delete();
It is also useful for bulk deletes.
If you dont want to query for it just create an entity, and then delete it.
Customer customer = new Customer() { Id = 1 } ;
context.AttachTo("Customers", customer);
context.DeleteObject(customer);
context.Savechanges();
I am using the following code in one of my projects:
using (var _context = new DBContext(new DbContextOptions<DBContext>()))
{
try
{
_context.MyItems.Remove(new MyItem() { MyItemId = id });
await _context.SaveChangesAsync();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
if (!_context.MyItems.Any(i => i.MyItemId == id))
{
return NotFound();
}
else
{
throw ex;
}
}
}
This way, it will query the database twice only if an exception occurs when trying to remove the item with the specified ID. Then if the item is not found, it returns a meaningful message; otherwise, it just throws the exception back (you can handle this in a way more fit to your case using different catch blocks for different exception types, add more custom checks using if blocks etc.).
[I am using this code in a MVC .Net Core/.Net Core project with Entity Framework Core.]
This answer is actually taken from Scott Allen's course titled ASP.NET MVC 5 Fundamentals. I thought I'd share because I think it is slightly simpler and more intuitive than any of the answers here already. Also note according to Scott Allen and other trainings I've done, find method is an optimized way to retrieve a resource from database that can use caching if it already has been retrieved. In this code, collection refers to a DBSet of objects. Object can be any generic object type.
var object = context.collection.Find(id);
context.collection.Remove(object);
context.SaveChanges();
dwkd's answer mostly worked for me in Entity Framework core, except when I saw this exception:
InvalidOperationException: The instance of entity type 'Customer' cannot
be tracked because another instance with the same key value for {'Id'}
is already being tracked. When attaching existing entities, ensure
that only one entity instance with a given key value is attached.
Consider using 'DbContextOptionsBuilder.EnableSensitiveDataLogging' to
see the conflicting key values.
To avoid the exception, I updated the code:
Customer customer = context.Customers.Local.First(c => c.Id == id);
if (customer == null) {
customer = new Customer () { Id = id };
context.Customers.Attach(customer);
}
context.Customers.Remove(customer);
context.SaveChanges();
A smaller version (when compared to previous ones):
var customer = context.Find(id);
context.Delete(customer);
context.SaveChanges();
In EF Core, if you don't care if the object exists or not, and you just care that it will not be in the DB, the simplest would be:
context.Remove(new Customer(Id: id)); // adds the object in "Deleted" state
context.SaveChanges(); // commits the removal
You don't really need Attach() - it adds the object to the change tracker in the Unchanged state and Remove() adds the object to the tracker in the Deleted state. The most important thing, however, is that you do only one roundtrip to the backend.
Raw sql query is fastest way I suppose
public void DeleteCustomer(int id)
{
using (var context = new Context())
{
const string query = "DELETE FROM [dbo].[Customers] WHERE [id]={0}";
var rows = context.Database.ExecuteSqlCommand(query,id);
// rows >= 1 - count of deleted rows,
// rows = 0 - nothing to delete.
}
}
From official documentation (and the most efficient one I have found so far):
Student studentToDelete = new Student() { ID = id };
_context.Entry(studentToDelete).State = EntityState.Deleted;
await _context.SaveChangesAsync();
Easier and more understandable version.
var customer = context.Find<Customer>(id);
context.Remove(customer);
context.SaveChanges();
Since Entity Framework Core 7 you can use this:
await context.Customers.Where(c => c.Id == 1).ExecuteDeleteAsync();