currently I am working at a project which requires to be backwards compatible with (non-EF) databases, but also want to create a new database from model.
For this task I save the current schema somewhere (in XML form) and update the databases with raw sql update steps, until they match the schema, which is working fine.
Also, the modelBuilder matches the schema (as in, my algorithm finds no difference between the newly created database by context.Database.Create() and my saved schema) currently.
Since the schema will most likely change in later stages of development, I do have to support two ways to create an Up-to-date database and was wondering if I could combine these two - since now I have to update the saved target schema, create the update steps AND update my modelBuilder so that is creates exactly the database I need - which would be quite a tedious task.
So since there is probably no way to "translate" my schema to modelBuilder entries and because there is more not mapped information in my POCO classes (which prohibits the approach of updating a correct database and update my classes database first) the only (visible to me) way would be to somehow gather the CREATE TABLE statements a context would create when I call Database.Create() which I can use to update my schema and the update steps accordingly.
I know quite sure I can do the same by logging the context while calling the Create() method, however - this will take quite some time, will issue some queries I do not need and will create a dump database I have to get rid of afterwards each time I update my model.
So I was wondering if there was a way to inspect the modelBuilder (or the context, of course) and somehow see what the tables would look like it maps to.
Related
Inside of OnModelCreating, I want to be able to ignore a column if the database is on an older migration EF Core 5 throws an exception if I attempt to read from the database directly, or indirectly by querying the applied migrations. I'm not certian that it's even a good idea, since OnModelCreating is used during the migration 😩, but I'll burn that bridge when I cross it.
There are some examples on how one would do this with EF6, but they don't seem to apply anymore with EF Core.
While Ivan Stoev is right that --generally-- you should model the target database without outside input, the real world isn't always that clear-cut. In my particular case, there are multiple service instances (Azure Functions) that need to read and write to a single database. In order to maintain zero downtime, those Functions need to not read or write columns that don't yet exist.
I solved the problem the way Serge suggested. The database has a known version, populated with seed data that increments with every migration. On startup, the service reads that version with a regular old Microsoft.Data.Sql.SqlConnection. This version is then added to the IServiceCollection as a singleton to be used by the DbContext constructor.
When talking to an older database version, OnModelCreating does things like this:
builder.Entity<Widget>(w =>
{
// another option would be to use the migrations table instead of an integer
if (DatabaseVersion < ContextVersions.WidgetNewPropertyAddedVersion)
{
w.Ignore(w => w.NewProperty);
}
else
{
w.Property(w => w.NewProperty)
.HasDefaultValue(0);
}
});
The startup code also detects if it's been started by the Entity Framework tools and does not read the database version, instead assuming "latest". This way, we do not ignore new properties when building the migration.
Figuring out how to let the service instances know that the database has been upgraded and they should restart to get the new database model is an exercise left up to the reader. :)
I have been using Database First Entity Framework (EDMX) and SQL Server Data Tools Database Projects in combination very successfully - change the schema in the database and 'Update Model from Database' to get them into the EDMX. I see though that Entity Framework 7 will be dropping the EDMX format and I am looking for a new process that will allow me to use Code First in Combination with Database Projects.
Lots of my existing development and deployment processes rely on having a database project that contains the schema. This goes in source control is deployed along with the code and is used to update the production database complete with data migration using pre and post deployment scripts. I would be reluctant to drop it.
I would be keen to split one big EDMX into many smaller models as part of this work. This will mean multiple Code First models referencing the same database.
Assuming that I have an existing database and a database project to go with it - I am thinking that I would start by using the following wizard to create an initial set of entity and context classes - I would do this for each of the models.
Add | New Item... | Visual C# Items | Data | ADO.NET Entity Data Model | Code first from database
My problem is - where do I go from there? How do I handle schema changes? As long as I can get the database schema updated, I can use a schema compare operation to get the changes into the project.
These are the options that I am considering.
Make changes in the database and use the wizard from above to regenerate. I guess that I would need to keep any modifications to the entity and/or context classes in partial classes so that they do not get overwritten. Automating this with a list of tables etc to include would be handy. Powershell or T4 Templates maybe? SqlSharpener (suggested by Keith in comments) looks like it might help here. I would also look at disabling all but the checks for database existence and schema compatibility here, as suggested by Steve Green in the comments.
Make changes in code and use migrations to get these changes applied to the database. From what I understand, not having models map cleanly to database schemas (mine don't) might pose problems. I also see some complaints on the net that migrations do not cover all database object types - this was also my experience when I played around with Code First a while back - unique constraints I think were not covered. Has this improved in Entity Framework 7?
Make changes in the database and then use migrations as a kind of comparison between code and the database. See what the differences are and adjust the code to suit. Keep going until there are no differences.
Make changes manually in both code and the database. Obviously, this is not very appealing.
Which of these would be best? Is there anything that I would need to know before trying to implement it? Are there any other, better options?
So the path that we ended up taking was to create some T4 templates that generate both a DbContext and our entities. We provide the entity T4 a list of tables from which to generate entities and have a syntax to indicate that the entity based on one table should inherit from the entity based on another. Custom code goes in partial classes. So our solution looks most like my option 1 from above.
Also, we started out generating fluent configuration in OnModelCreating in the DbContext but have swapped to using attributes on the Entities (where attributes exist - HasPrecision was one that we had to use fluent configuration for). We found that it is more concise and easier to locate the configuration for a property when it is right there decorating that property.
I don't know whether to following is possible however I'd like to hear other opinions.
I have an existing database. I will use only certain number of tables and certain columns of those tables. To do that first I created classes and created specific mappings between these classes and database tables. Then implemented DbContext... so far I don't have any problem.
In the second part of the project there are classes which might not exist in the database. So when I run the project if they don't exist I want to implement those, like a normal codefirst implementation however I shouldn't touch other tables in the database.
Any thoughts?
Best
In the second part of the project there are classes which might not exist in the database. So when I run the project if they don't exist I want to implement those, like a normal code first implementation however I shouldn't touch other tables in the database
use Ignore property in your dbcontext, overriding modelbuilder property
modelBuilder.Entity<YourClass>().Ignore();
This will not hamper your database if this class is not mapped in database.
Hope this helps.
My database model (sometimes referred to as "context") is dynamically assembled at startup based on which services and/or plugins are installed. Plugins and services export their model definition fragments through my IoC container and the application core picks them up and runs them when the DbContext.OnModelCreating method is called.
The question is: Can I (and how do I) use Code First Migrations with this setup?
(below is more information on what I've tried and what particular problems are)
In my previous project, the database was inherited from some old code so we couldn't use any of the Code First database generation stuff anyway. We simply kept a long line of delta scripts and executed them manually on deploy (it was a single-host kind of project).
Now I'm starting a new project, and this time, the database is brand new, ready for Code First to play with. Initially, I was all excited about Code First Migrations, seemed like the way to go. Until I actually tried it. The initial attempt, quite obviously, failed due to the absence of an explicitly defined DbContext in my project.
So far, it looks like the only viable option is to manually code migrations, with which I am perfectly fine. However, it turns out that this is not as simple as just creating a few classes inherited from DbMigration.
After some experimentation on a small test project, I was able to find out that the migration autogenerator adds an implementation of IMigrationMetadata, which, among other things, contains a hash of my model as the values of the Source and Target properties. Presumably, this hash is then used to identify a path across migrations from the "current" state of the database (as recorded in the __MigrationHistory table) to the newest state as defined by the model in code. This totally makes sense, but...
Naturally, I have no idea where to get that hash for my model, which makes me unable to implement IMigrationMetadata on my migrations.
On the other hand, I see that the metadata interface is not included in the DbMigration class itself, which makes me think that it might be optional. It then follows that migrations can actually work without the hash values, but the question is - how?
All the information I could find on the internet is just simple, very basic tutorials. No information on how to create migrations manually (and whether it's even supported). No documentation on how it actually works and how to extend it. And it is not quite obvious from outside.
I am ready to resort to ILSpy at this point, but the whole EF is so complex that I fear I may not be able to find what I need in reasonable time.
Here are a few ideas that you could pull together to find a solution that works for you. I realize I mentioned some of these in our other thread, but I'm including them here for others reading this question.
Automatic migrations allow Code First to automatically calculate and apply changes to the database.
You can write your own code to generate and apply migrations. I've written a post about applying migrations and the MigrationsScaffolder class will help you create migrations.
When you run the project , an extra table is created in the database.
EdmMetadata table
The hash is always created with the help of EdmMetadata Entity and the current code first model. It is SHA-256 hash stored in the EdmMetadata table of the database. You can get it from that table.
Methodology to be followed will be:
Get the hash of the current model using
var hash=GetModelHash(OldContext);
Check whether the model in the code (new model) is compatible with the model in database(old model) using
CompatibleWithModel(hash,CurrentContext,ObjectContext)
This method returns bool.
If it is not compatible, then delete the existing tables in the database.
Create new tables
Save the current hash to the databse
Seed the data.
The code may look like:
{
var objectContext = ((IObjectContextAdapter)context).ObjectContext;
var modelHash = GetModelHash(objectContext);
if (CompatibleWithModel(modelHash, context, objectContext))
return;
DeleteExistingTables(objectContext);
CreateTables(objectContext);
SaveModelHashToDatabase(context, modelHash, objectContext);
SeedData(context);
}
Be sure to make the class inherited from
IDatabaseInitializer<T> where T:DbContext
I'm building my EF (v4.0.30319) data model from my SQL Server database. Each table has Created and Updated fields populated via database triggers.
This database is the backend of a ASP.NET Web API application and I recently discovered a problem. The problem is, since the Created and Updated fields are not populated in the model passed into the api endpoint, they are written to the database as NULL. This overwrites any values already in the database for those properties.
I discovered I can edit the EF data model and just delete those two columns from the entity. It works and the datetimes are not overwritten with NULL. But this leads to another, less serious but more annoying, problem... my data model has a bunch of tables that contain these properties and all the tables need to be updated by removing these two columns.
Is there a way to tell EF to ignore certain columns in entities across the entire data model without manually deleting them?
As far as I know, no. Generating the model from the database is going to always create all of the fields from the database table. Well, as long as it has a primary key it will.
It is possible to only update the fields that you want i.e. don't include the "Created" and "Updated" fields in your create and update methods. I'd have to say though, that I'd think it'd be better if those fields didn't even exist on the model at that point. You may at one point see those fields on the model and not remember that they won't get persisted to the DB.
You may want to look into just inserting the datetimes into those fields when you call your create() and update() methods. Then you could just ditch the triggers. You'd obviously want to use a class library for all of your database operations so this functionality would be in one place. To keep it nice and neat, you know?