Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I don't know how to configure following relations in EF:
Imagine I need to create some language dictionary model. I have an item (word for example) in one language and in another language. There is some relation between these two items.
For instance: "hund" (German) -> "dog" (English), relation type is "Translate"
public enum Language
{
English,
German,
}
public class Item
{
public long ID { get; set; }
[Required]
public string Value { get; set; }
[Required]
public Language Language { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<ItemRelation> ItemRelations { get; set; }
}
public enum ItemRelationType
{
Translate,
Synonym,
}
public class ItemRelation
{
public long ID { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("ItemID")]
public Item Item { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("RelativeItemID")]
public Item RelativeItem { get; set; }
[Required]
public ItemRelationType Type { get; set; }
}
EF standard migration throw some error in one case or creates columns or FKs I don't wont (Item_ID etc.) in the other.
I guess I need to configure some fluent api - but I am not sure how...
You are missing the actual FK fields ItemID and RelativeItemID:
And to configure the navigation property you can use InverseProperty attribute, along with disabling a bit of EF convention(shown below).
public class ItemRelation
{
public long ID { get; set; }
public long ItemID { get; set; } // Missing
[ForeignKey("ItemID")]
[InverseProperty("ItemRelations")]
public virtual Item Item { get; set; }
public long RelativeItemID { get; set; } // Missing
[ForeignKey("RelativeItemID")]
[InverseProperty("RelativeItemRelations")]
public virtual Item RelativeItem { get; set; }
[Required]
public ItemRelationType Type { get; set; }
}
The declaration above uses virtual so that lazy loading works. It's not necessary and you can remove it. The consequence is that lazy loading won't work, which is ok too.
Assuming you want a navigation property for the second relation you need to add the property:
public class Item
{
...
public virtual ICollection<ItemRelation> RelativeItemRelations { get; set; }
...
}
And then disable the cascading delete convention by overriding OnModelCreating, if you haven't already, in your context class as follows:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
...
modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<OneToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
...
This solution should work but it is effectively disabling cascade delete to all one to many relationships. The upside is that you can get it back on a case by case basis by using fluent api.
The second way to achieve what you want is to just use fluent api as follows:
Add the second navigation property to your Item entity:
public class Item
{
...
public virtual ICollection<ItemRelation> RelativeItemRelations { get; set; }
...
}
ItemRelation entity is missing the FKs, so here it is:
public class ItemRelation
{
public long ID { get; set; }
public long ItemID { get; set; } // Missing
public virtual Item Item { get; set; }
public long RelativeItemID { get; set; } // Missing
public virtual Item RelativeItem { get; set; }
[Required]
public ItemRelationType Type { get; set; }
}
And to configure the navigation property, and avoid the cascading issue, you just define the relationship using fluent api:
public TheContext : DbContext
{
public DbSet<Item> Items { get; set; }
public DbSet<ItemRelation> ItemRelations { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
modelBuilder.Entity<ItemRelation>()
.HasRequired(e => e.Item)
.WithMany(t => t.ItemRelations)
.HasForeignKey(e => e.ItemID)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
modelBuilder.Entity<ItemRelation>()
.HasRequired(e => e.RelatedItem)
.WithMany(t => t.RelativeItemRelations)
.HasForeignKey(e => e.RelativeItemID)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
// Uncomment the following if you want to disable all cascading deletes and automatic fk creation conventions
// modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<ForeignKeyIndexConvention>();
// modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<OneToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
// modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<ManyToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
...
}
}
Read here for an opinion on why you might consider disabling those conventions.
I think you might be able to get away with this:
public class ItemRelation
{
public long Id { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("PrimaryItemId")]
public Item Item { get; set; }
public long PrimaryItemId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("RelatedItemId")]
public Item RelatedItem { get; set; }
public long RelatedItemId { get; set; }
public ItemRelationType RelationType;
}
Notice that this class now has TWO relations to the Item entity, resulting in two foreign keys. Notice that each Item property has a [ForeignKey] attribute, with the string argument specifying the long to use as the foreign key column.
View this answer as a nudge on a different track. Research this topic more to see if it fits your use case.
Related
How to resolve "Navigation properties can only participate in a single relationship." error on below case?
1 company has many Milestone and MissionValueStory, where Milestone and MissionValueStory share same table with different typeId, and each of those has many translation where link up with companyInfoId only
Or BETTER break the relationship between companyInfo and company, and just another query to fetch companyInfo is much easy?
public class Company
{
[key]
public long Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<CompanyInfo> Milestone { get; set; } //multi
public virtual ICollection<CompanyInfo> MissionValueStory { get; set; } //multi
}
public class CompanyInfo
{
[key]
public long Id { get; set; }
public long typeId { get; set; }
[Required]
public long CompanyId { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public string Text { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CompanyId")]
public virtual Company Company { get; set; }
public ICollection<Translation> Translation { get; set; }
}
public class Translation
{
[key]
public long Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
[Required]
public long CompanyInfoId { get; set; }
public string Language { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CompanyInfoId")]
public virtual CompanyInfo CompanyInfo { get; set; }
}
modelBuilder.Entity<Company>()
.HasMany(e => e.Milestone)
.WithOne(t => t.Company)
.HasForeignKey(m => m.CompanyId).IsRequired()
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Cascade);
modelBuilder.Entity<Company>()
.HasMany(e => e.MissionValueStory)
.WithOne(t => t.Company)
.HasForeignKey(m => m.CompanyId).IsRequired()
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Cascade);
modelBuilder.Entity<CompanyInfo>()
.HasMany(e => e.Translation)
.WithOne(t => t.CompanyInfo).IsRequired();
What you're trying to do is legitimately not supported. At least in the way you're going about this. Fortunately there's a fairly painless solution for you. Use Table Per Hierarchy.
Change the class CompanyInfo to be an abstract class called CompanyInfoBase, and let it be an abstract type. Make typeId abstract on CompanyInfoBase.
Create two new classes that implement CompanyInfoBase:
public class MilestoneCompanyInfo : CompanyInfoBase
{
public override long typeId { get; set; } = MILESTONE_TYPE_ID;
}
public class MissionValueStoryCompanyInfo : CompanyInfoBase
{
public override long typeId { get; set; } = MISSION_VALUE_STORY_TYPE_ID;
}
where MILESTONE_TYPE_ID and MISSION_VALUE_STORY_TYPE_ID are some sort of predefined constants.
Then, in your DbContext's OnModelCreating, use typeId as your discriminator.
It'll look something like this:
modelBuilder.Entity<CompanyInfoBase>()
.HasDiscriminator<long>(nameof(CompanyInfoBase.typeId))
.HasValue<MilestoneCompanyInfo>(MILESTONE_TYPE_ID)
.HasValue<MissionValueStoryCompanyInfo>(MISSION_VALUE_STORY_TYPE_ID);
Since you're changing the name of the entity, it's worth setting the table name to accommodate your existing db. Something like:
modelBuilder.Entity<CompanyInfoBase>().ToTable("CompanyInfos");
Note to other readers: It's only required to define the discriminator like this due to his decision to use a long. If he had just left it undefined then EF Core automagically handles this (by creating a column named discriminator that contains the concrete class names).
Here's a link to the inheritance reference page: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/data/ef-mvc/inheritance
I have a POCO Entity named Employee.
And then I have a second POCO Entity named Case.
I want a navigation property that looks like instead this:
public class Case : BaseEntity
{
public long EmployeeId { get; set; }
public virtual Employee Employee{ get; set; }
like this:
public class Case : BaseEntity
{
public long InitialContactId { get; set; }
public virtual Employee InitialContact { get; set; }
I want to name my property InitialContact. Not Employee.
But I get this error when EF tries to create the Database:
Unable to determine the relationship represented by navigation property 'Case.InitialContact' of type 'Employee'. Either manually configure the relationship, or ignore this property from the model.
Update 1:
I got it to work like this:
public class Case : BaseEntity
{
public long InitialContactId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Id")]
public virtual Employee InitialContact { get; set; }
public DateTime InitalConsultDate { get; set; }
public Guid AppUserId { get; set; }
public virtual AppUser LerSpecialist { get; set; }
}
The primary key is ID in my BaseEntity. Not EmployeeId.
But I have second part to my question.
Here is my Complete Employee POCO:
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations.Schema;
using Hrsa.Core.Generic.Model.Framework.Concrete;
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.ModelBinding;
namespace Hrsa.Core.Generic.Model.Lerd
{
public class Employee : BaseEntity
{
[BindNever]
public string Email { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public long OrganizationId { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public string Supervisor { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public string SupervisorEmail { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public string FirstName { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public string LastName { get; set; }
public string Notes { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public long BargainingUnitId { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public long PayPlanId { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public long GradeRankId { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public long PositionTitleId { get; set; }
[BindNever]
public long SeriesId { get; set; }
public bool IsUnionEmployee { get; set; }
public virtual Organization Organization { get; set; }
public virtual BargainingUnit BargainingUnit { get; set; }
public virtual PayPlan PayPlan { get; set; }
public virtual GradeRank GradeRank { get; set; }
public virtual PositionTitle PositionTitle { get; set; }
public virtual Series Series { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<UnionHours> UnionHours { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Case> Cases { get; set; }
[NotMapped]
public string UnionEmployeeYesNo => (IsUnionEmployee) ? "Yes" : "No";
}
}
I want my Employee to have many Cases:
public virtual ICollection<Case> Cases { get; set; }
Here is my complete Cases POCO:
public class Case : BaseEntity
{
public long InitialContactId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Id")]
public virtual Employee InitialContact { get; set; }
public DateTime InitalConsultDate { get; set; }
public Guid AppUserId { get; set; }
public virtual AppUser LerSpecialist { get; set; }
}
So now my DB looks like this:
So I have my InitialContactId in Cases ok.
But now I need my Case to have many Employees.
So I add this in to my Case POCO:
public virtual ICollection<Employee> Employees { get; set; }
Now it looks like this:
public class Case : BaseEntity
{
public long InitialContactId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Id")]
public virtual Employee InitialContact { get; set; }
public DateTime InitalConsultDate { get; set; }
public Guid AppUserId { get; set; }
public virtual AppUser LerSpecialist { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Employee> Employees { get; set; }
}
Now when I run it, I get this error again:
Unable to determine the relationship represented by navigation property 'Case.InitialContact' of type 'Employee'. Either manually configure the relationship, or ignore this property from the model.
Update 2:
I found this article for a Many-Many relationship in .Net Core 1:
http://www.learnentityframeworkcore.com/configuration/many-to-many-relationship-configuration
So now I have a bridge lookup entity:
public class EmployeeCase
{
[ForeignKey("Id")]
public long EmployeeId { get; set; }
public Employee Employee { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Id")]
public long CaseId { get; set; }
public Case Case { get; set; }
}
Employee POCO:
Changed:
public virtual ICollection<Case> Cases { get; set; }
to:
// Mapping - Collection of Cases
public virtual ICollection<EmployeeCase> EmployeeCases { get; set; }
Case POCO:
Changed:
public virtual ICollection<Employee> Employees { get; set; }
to:
// Mapping - Collection of Employees
public virtual ICollection<EmployeeCase> EmployeeCases { get; set; }
In my AppDbContext
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
#region Many-to-Many Employees Cases
modelBuilder.Entity<EmployeeCase>()
.HasKey(ec => new { ec.EmployeeId, ec.CaseId });
modelBuilder.Entity<EmployeeCase>()
.HasOne(ec => ec.Employee)
.WithMany(e => e.EmployeeCases)
.HasForeignKey(ec => ec.EmployeeId);
modelBuilder.Entity<EmployeeCase>()
.HasOne(ec => ec.Case)
.WithMany(c => c.EmployeeCases)
.HasForeignKey(ec => ec.CaseId);
#endregion
}
Now when I run I get this error:
An exception of type 'System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException' occurred in Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Relational.dll but was not handled in user code
Additional information: Introducing FOREIGN KEY constraint 'FK_EmployeeCase_Employees_EmployeeId' on table 'EmployeeCase' may cause cycles or multiple cascade paths. Specify ON DELETE NO ACTION or ON UPDATE NO ACTION, or modify other FOREIGN KEY constraints.
Could not create constraint or index. See previous errors.
Update 3:
Finally got my tables the way I want with this piece of code from:
Introducing FOREIGN KEY constraint may cause cycles or multiple cascade paths - why?
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
// Get rid of Cascading Circular error on ModelBuilding
foreach (var relationShip in modelBuilder.Model.GetEntityTypes().SelectMany(e => e.GetForeignKeys()))
{
relationShip.DeleteBehavior = DeleteBehavior.Restrict;
}
#region Many-to-Many Employees Cases
modelBuilder.Entity<EmployeeCase>()
.HasKey(ec => new { ec.EmployeeId, ec.CaseId });
modelBuilder.Entity<EmployeeCase>()
.HasOne(ec => ec.Employee)
.WithMany(e => e.EmployeeCases)
.HasForeignKey(ec => ec.EmployeeId);
modelBuilder.Entity<EmployeeCase>()
.HasOne(ec => ec.Case)
.WithMany(c => c.EmployeeCases)
.HasForeignKey(ec => ec.CaseId);
#endregion
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
Update 4:
This did not work after all.
Remvoving the delete behavior for everything messes up my other relationships and I get errors.
How can I fix this?
This is disgusting.
So wishing I did not go Core.
Entity Framework uses conventions to guess how to map your C# model to database objects.
In your case you violate convention by custom name, so you should explain Entity Framework how to map this stuff.
There are two possible ways: attributes and fluent API. I'd suggest to use the latter one.
See section "Configuring a Foreign Key Name That Does Not Follow the Code First Convention" here: Entity Framework Fluent API - Relationships
I have made it a habit of explicitly defining my relationships as EF does not always get them the way I want. I like to create a Mapping folder that contains my entity maps. The fluent api works great for this and inherits from EntityTypeConfiguration.
Try this.
public class CaseMap : EntityTypeConfiguration<Case>
{
public CaseMap()
{
HasKey(m => m.Id)
HasRequired(m => m.InitialContact)
.WithMany(e => e.Cases)
.HasForeignKey(m => m.InitialContactId);
}
}
Almost forgot. You need to tell your DbContext where to find these mappings. Add this to your DbContexts OnModelCreating method.
modelBuilder.Configurations.AddFromAssembly(typeof(MyContext).Assembly);
This is what worked finally for the Cascading Delete circular references on the many-to-many in EF Core:
// Get rid of Cascading Delete Circular references error.
var type = modelBuilder.Model.GetEntityTypes().Single(t => t.Name == "Hrsa.Core.Generic.Model.Lerd.EmployeeCase");
foreach (var relationship in type.GetForeignKeys())
{
relationship.DeleteBehavior = DeleteBehavior.Restrict;
}
You have to get the Entity representing the many to many lookup only.
And from there restrict the DeleteBehavior.
I have an ArticleComment entity as you can see below:
public class ArticleComment
{
public int ArticleCommentId { get; set; }
public int? ArticleCommentParentId { get; set; }
//[ForeignKey("ArticleCommentParentId")]
public virtual ArticleComment Comment { get; set; }
public DateTime ArticleDateCreated { get; set; }
public string ArticleCommentName { get; set; }
public string ArticleCommentEmail { get; set; }
public string ArticleCommentWebSite { get; set; }
public string AricleCommentBody { get; set; }
//[ForeignKey("UserIDfk")]
public virtual ApplicationUser ApplicationUser { get; set; }
public Guid? UserIDfk { get; set; }
public int ArticleIDfk { get; set; }
//[ForeignKey("ArticleIDfk")]
public virtual Article Article { get; set; }
}
I want to define a foreign key relationship in such a way that one comment can have many reply or child, I've tried to create the relationship using fluent API like this:
builder.Entity<ArticleComment>()
.HasOne(p => p.Comment)
.WithMany()
.HasForeignKey(p => p.ArticleCommentParentId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict)
.IsRequired(false);
I followed the solution that was proposed here and here, but I get an error with the message:
Introducing FOREIGN KEY constraint 'FK_ArticleComment_ArticleComment_ArticleCommentParentId' on table 'ArticleComment' may cause cycles or multiple cascade paths. Specify ON DELETE NO ACTION or ON UPDATE NO ACTION, or modify other FOREIGN KEY constraints.
Could not create constraint or index. See previous errors.
First I though by setting the OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict) this would go away, but the problem persist, also I've tried to use the data annotation [ForeignKey("ArticleCommentParentId")] as you can see the commented code in the ArticleComment definition, but it didn't work, I'd appreciate any though on this.
You are not modeling correctly your entity. Each comment needs a Set of replies, which are of type ArticleComment too, and each of those replies are the ones that point back to its parent (Note the added ICollection Replies property):
public class ArticleComment
{
public ArticleComment()
{
Replies = new HashSet<ArticleComment>();
}
public int ArticleCommentId { get; set; }
public int? ParentArticleCommentId { get; set; }
public virtual ArticleComment ParentArticleComment{ get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<ArticleComment> Replies { get; set; }
//The rest of the properties omitted for clarity...
}
...and the fluent Mapping:
modelBuilder.Entity<ArticleComment>(entity =>
{
entity
.HasMany(e => e.Replies )
.WithOne(e => e.ParentArticleComment) //Each comment from Replies points back to its parent
.HasForeignKey(e => e.ParentArticleCommentId );
});
With the above setup you get an open-ended tree structure.
EDIT:
Using attributes you just need to decorate ParentArticleComment property.
Take into account that in this case EF will resolve all the relations by convention.
[ForeignKey("ParentArticleCommentId")]
public virtual ArticleComment ParentArticleComment{ get; set; }
For collection properties EF is intelligent enough to understand the relation.
I simplified the class (removing foreign key support fields) and it works.
It could be an issue of your EF version (I've just installed it but actually I think I'm using rc1 but I'm not sure because I had several dependency issues) or it could be your model.
Anyway, this source works fine
public class ArticleComment
{
public int ArticleCommentId { get; set; }
public virtual ArticleComment Comment { get; set; }
public DateTime ArticleDateCreated { get; set; }
public string ArticleCommentName { get; set; }
public string ArticleCommentEmail { get; set; }
public string ArticleCommentWebSite { get; set; }
public string AricleCommentBody { get; set; }
}
class Context : DbContext
{
public Context(DbContextOptions dbContextOptions) : base(dbContextOptions)
{}
public DbSet<ArticleComment> Comments { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<ArticleComment>()
.HasOne(p => p.Comment)
.WithMany();
}
}
static class SampleData
{
public static void Initialize(Context context)
{
if (!context.Comments.Any())
{
var comment1 = new ArticleComment()
{
AricleCommentBody = "Article 1"
};
var comment2 = new ArticleComment()
{
AricleCommentBody = "Article 2 that referes to 1",
Comment = comment1
};
context.Comments.Add(comment2);
context.Comments.Add(comment1);
context.SaveChanges();
}
}
}
I have following entity class called Code. It stores categories of different kinds - the data for which I would have otherwise needed to create many small tables e.g. User Categories, Expense Categories, Address types, User Types, file formats etc.
public class Code
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string CodeType { get; set; }
public string CodeDescription { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Expense> Expenses { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Address> Addresses { get; set; }
:
: // many more
}
The class Expense looks like this:
public class Expense
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int CategoryId { get; set; }
public virtual Code Category { get; set; }
public int SourceId { get; set; }
public double Amount { get; set; }
public DateTime ExpenseDate { get; set; }
}
With the above class definitions, I have established 1:many relation between Code and Expense using the CategoryId mapping.
My problem is, I want to map the SourceId field in Expense to the Code object. Which means, Expense object would contain
public Code Source { get; set; }
If I use this, at runtime I get an error about cyclic dependencies.
Can someone please help?
You will need to disable cascading delete on at least one of the two relationships (or both). EF enables cascading delete by convention for both relationships because both are required since the foreign key properties are not nullable. But SQL Server doesn't accept multiple cascading delete paths onto the same table that are introduced by the two relationships. That's the reason for your exception.
You must override the convention with Fluent API:
public class Code
{
public int Id { get; set; }
//...
public virtual ICollection<Expense> Expenses { get; set; }
//...
}
public class Expense
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int CategoryId { get; set; }
public virtual Code Category { get; set; }
public int SourceId { get; set; }
public virtual Code Source { get; set; }
//...
}
Mapping with Fluent API;
modelBuilder.Entity<Expense>()
.HasRequired(e => e.Category)
.WithMany(c => c.Expenses)
.HasForeignKey(e => e.CategoryId)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
modelBuilder.Entity<Expense>()
.HasRequired(e => e.Source)
.WithMany()
.HasForeignKey(e => e.SourceId)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
I have a scenario I'm getting a little muddled with using EF code first. The classes I've created are below:
public class Company
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public List<Contact> Contacts { get; set; }
public List<Job> Jobs { get; set; }
}
public class Contact
{
public int Id { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CompanyId")]
public virtual Company Company { get; set; }
public int CompanyId { get; set; }
public List<Job> Jobs { get; set; }
}
public class Job
{
public int Id { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CompanyContactId")]
public virtual CompanyContact CompanyContact { get; set; }
public int CompanyContactId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CompanyId")]
public virtual Company Company { get; set; }
public int CompanyId { get; set; }
}
However, when I build the DB I get the following error:
Introducing FOREIGN KEY constraint 'FK_Contacts_Company_CompanyId' on table 'Contacts' may cause cycles or multiple cascade paths. Specify ON DELETE NO ACTION or ON UPDATE NO ACTION, or modify other FOREIGN KEY constraints.
So a little research indicates the answer to this is to use the Fluent API to define the mappings as required but I can't get my head around how to do this or find an example of a similar scenario.
I realise I could remove the Company class from Job and navigate through Contact but I'd prefer not to if possible.
Any help gratefully received
You want to use the EF model builder to set up these relationships.
An example of how you would do this for one of your properties would be the following:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Contact>().HasOptional(e => e.Company).WithMany(c=>c.Contacts);
}
For more of an explanation around how to use the modelbuilder take a look at my article on EF Navigation Properties