What does error 208 means? the query:
dependencies
| where type == "SQL" and success == "False"
| summarize count() by resultCode
is giving me 4500+ itens on the last hour alone and I can't seem to find any solid documentation about this.
Details:
The frequency of error rises as concurrency rises, meaning 1000 concurrent requests will generate more erros than 1000 sequential ones.
My application is Asp.Net MVC 4 framework 4.6 using latest EF
The error is intermittent. Performing a certain operation won't definitely result in the error
I don't think that this error means "Invalid Object Name" (as per other threads) because i can see EF auto-retrying this and eventually it goes through and the whole request is successfully returned (otherwise i would have A LOT of missed phone calls...)
The error occurs on both ASYNC and sync requests
I got in touch with MS support and according to them, this is caused by entity framework. Apparently EF keeps looking for 2 tables (migrationsHistory and edmMetadata) that I deliberately deleted. although that makes sense, i don't know why that error does not present itself on our in-house tests (the table are not present on the in-house dev env too...)
Above answer is correct however Id like to add additional information:
You need to have MigrationHistory table and it has to be populated correctly. edmMetadata is old table which was replaced by MigrationHistory so no need to worry about that.
Just by adding MigrationHistory tabled did not solve the issue completely ( I was down to 3 exceptions 208 from 5 ).
However, keep in mind that populating MigrationHistory table will render your dbContext out of sync if latest migration is not inserted in MigrationHistory!
Best way to get this is to issue:
UpdateDatabase -script
command and copy CREATE/INSERT/UPDATE statements from there.
Related
I created a plugin that runs on update when updating 3 fields, the plugin will run a fetchXML and get the records from another entity that has the first record Guid as a lookup then I will apply a loop to update those records with the value of the 3 fields (the fields that have changed).
The problem is that the fetchXML return 1290 records (and it could be more or less) but there is a time limit of execution which is 2 minutes, this limitation apply to both plugin and custom workflow (sync or async), from my research you can't override this limitation in Dynamics crm online.
I really don't know how to solve this issue, it seems I can't use a console app either.
Are there any other possibilities?
In those situations - we will move the long running code to Azure Function and invoke it from the plugin.
Read more
I am using Light switch on Azure.
After I modified a column in a record when I click the Save button I got
"Store update, insert, or delete statement affected an unexpected number of rows(0). Entties may have been modified or deleted since entities were loaded, Refresh ObjectStateManager entries.
I use VS 2012 on my dev machine debug this light switch app. it works fine and no errors when I modify the save column on same records then save it.
Is anybody in this forum has idea what could cause this? and how should I work around it?
I suspect the azure machine don't have the same version of EF with my dev machine. but in the Light switch project both client and server reference I could not find the EF is referenced there. So I don't know how I can bring the EF dll on my machine up to Azure machine.
Anybody could give me some suggestion on this?
Thanks
Chris
Usually it's a side effect of Optimistic Concurrency. This article can give you the idea of it in Lightswitch:
LightSwitch 2012 Concurrency Enhancements
When it's working on dev machine and it's not working on Azure, I guess something is not right in your production database.
you can also take a look at Entity framework: affected an unexpected number of rows(0)
Having Instead of insert/update triggers, sometimes SQL server does not report back an IdentityScope for each new inserted/updated row. Therefore EF can not realize the number of affected rows.
Normally, any insert/update into a table with identity column are immediately followed by a select of the scope_identity() to populate the associated value in the Entity Framework. The instead of trigger causes this second step to be missed, which leads to the 0 rows inserted error.
You can change your trigger to be either before or after insert or tweak your trigger by adding following line at the end of it:
select [Id] from [dbo].[TableXXX] where ##ROWCOUNT > 0 and [Id] = scope_identity()
Find more details in this or this thread.
We've been using Entity Framework Code First 5 for a little while now, without major issue.
I've recently discovered that ANY change I make to my model (such as adding a field, or removing a field) means that the Seed method no longer runs leaving my database in an invalid state.
If I reverse the change, the seed method runs fine.
I have tried making changes to varying parts of my model, so it's not the specific change which is relevant.
Anyone know how I can (a) debug what the specific issue is, or (b) come across this themselves and know how to fix it?
UPDATE: After the model change, however many times I query the database it doesn't run the Seed. However, I have found that if I manually run IISRESET, and then re-execute the web service which executes the query it does then run the seed! Anyone know why this would be the case, and why suddenly I need to reset IIS in between the database initialization and the Seed executing?
Many thanks Steve
I am using the Play! framework, and have a difficulty with in the following scenario.
I have a server process which has a 'read-only' transaction. This to prevent any possible database lock due to execution as it is a complicated procedure. There are one or two record to be stored, but I do that as a job, as I found doing them in the main thread could result in a deadlock under higher load.
However, in one occasion I need to create an object and subsequently use it.
However, when I create the object using a Job, wait for the resulting id (with a Promise return) and then search in the database for it, it cannot be found.
Is there an easy way to have the JPA search 'afresh' in the DB at this point? I implemented a 5 sec. pause to test, so I am sue it is not because the procedure hadn't finished yet.
Check if there is a transaction wrapped around your INSERT and if there is one check that the transaction is COMMITed.
I am currently using Entity Framework 4.2 with Code First. I currently have a Windows 2008 application server and a database server running on Amazon EC2. The application server has a Windows Service installed that runs once per day. The service executes the following code:
// returns between 2000-4000 records
var users = userRepository.GetSomeUsers();
// do some work
foreach (var user in users)
{
var userProcessed = new UserProcessed { User = user };
userProcessedRepository.Add(userProcessed);
}
// Calls SaveChanges() on DbContext
unitOfWork.Commit();
This code takes a few minutes to run. It also maxes out the CPU on the application server. I have tried the following measures:
Remove the unitOfWork.Commit() to see if it is network related when the application server talks to the database. This did not change the outcome.
Changed my application server from a medium instance to a high CPU instance on Amazon to see if it is resource related. This caused the server not to max out the CPU anymore and the execution time improved slightly. However, the execution time was still a few minutes.
As a test I modified the above code to run three times to see if execution time for the second and third loop using the same DbContext. Every consecutive loop took longer to run that the previous one but that could be related to using the same DbContext.
Am I missing something? Is it really possible that something as simple as this takes minutes to run? Even if I don't commit to the database after each loop? Is there a way to speed this up?
Entity Framework (as it stands) isn't really well suited to this kind of bulk operation. Are you able to use one of the bulk insert methods with EC2? Otherwise, you might find that hand-coding the T-SQL INSERT statements is significantly faster. If performance is important then that probably outweighs the benefits of using EF.
My guess is that your ObjectContext is accumulating a lot of entity instances. SaveChanges seems to have a phase that has time linear in the number of entities loaded. This is likely the reason for the fact that it is taking longer and longer.
A way to resolve this is to use multiple, smaller ObjectContexts to get rid of old entity instances.