I have a Job class
[Table("Jobs")]
public class Job
{
[Key]
[DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
[Column("fID")]
public int ID { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Note> Notes { get; set; }
}
The note class looks like this:
[Table("Note")]
public class Note
{
[Key]
[DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
[Column("fID")]
public int ID{get; set;}
[Column("fld_int_NoteTypeID")]
public int NoteTypeID { get; set; }
}
Whenever I request the Notes from a job like this:
var job= context.Jobs.Include(x => x.Notes).FirstOrDefault(x => x.ID == jobId);
I would like the query to implicitly add Where NoteTypeId == 8.
Is it possible to somehow add this clause or do I have to explicitly add it each time?
What about workaround? Add NotMapped property which filters Notes collection:
[Table("Jobs")]
public class Job
{
[Key]
[DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
[Column("fID")]
public int ID { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Note> Notes { get; set; }
[NotMapped]
public ICollection<Note> FilteredNotes
{
get
{
return Notes.Where(m => m.NoteTypeId == 8);
}
}
}
But the problem with this design is, when you select job like var job = context.Jobs.Include(x => x.Notes).FirstOrDefault(x => x.ID == jobId);, then you load all Notes to memory, then you can access filtered notes from memory like job.FilteredNotes. But when using LazyLoading it has advantage.
var job = context.Jobs.FirstOrDefault(x => x.ID == jobId);
var notes = job.FilteredNotes.ToList();
Update
You can also try Table-per-Hierarchy (TPH) mappimg. You have to create one abstract class and derived classes:
public abstract class Note
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int NoteTypeId { get; set; }
}
public class JobNote : Note
{
}
public class OtherNote : Note
{
}
Then override OnModelCreating method:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Note>()
.Map<JobNote>(m => m.Requires("NoteTypeId").HasValue(8))
.Map<OtherNote>(m => m.Requires("NoteTypeId").HasValue(3)); // For example
}
Please note that, I do not have enough knowledge about TPH. I am just trying to show some hint. Please read further about TPH.
Related
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 relatively new to the Code First approach to Entity Framework. I have used the Database First approach for a while now, but the Code First seems to be a better fit for the application I am currently developing. I am working with an existing MS SQL database, and I am not allowed to make any changes whatsoever to the database. The reason why I am using Code First is because the Fluent API allows me to dynamically assign a table name to a class.
That said, I have a predicament where I need to assign a relationship between 2 tables. One table, ArCodes, has a composite key made up of the CodeType and the Code (both are strings). The CodeType column determins the type of code and the Code column is the identifier unique to the code type.
public class ArCode {
[Column("cod_typ", Order = 0), Key]
public string CodeType { get; set; }
[Column("ar_cod", Order = 1), Key]
public string Code { get; set; }
[Column("desc")]
public string Description { get; set; }
}
The other table, Invoices, needs to have a relationship to the ArCodes table for both a "ship via" code and a "terms" code.
public class Invoice {
[Column("pi_hist_hdr_invc_no"), Key]
public int InvoiceNumber { get; set; }
[Column("shp_via_cod")]
public string ShipViaCode { get; set; }
public ArCode ShipVia { get; set; }
[Column("terms_cod")]
public string TermsCode { get; set; }
public ArCode Terms { get; set; }
}
I would like to setup the relationship for both the "ShipVia" property and the "Terms" property. However, I am not sure how to do so in regards to the CodeType portion of the composite key. For "ship via" codes the Code Type should be "S", and code "terms" codes, the code type should be "T".
I have tried the following in by DB Context, but it did not work:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder) {
// setup the table names
modelBuilder.Entity<ArCode>().ToTable("ARCODS" + CompanyCode);
modelBuilder.Entity<Invoice>().ToTable("IHSHDR" + CompanyCode);
//
// setup the relationships
//
// 1 Invoice <--> 0-1 Ship Via AR Codes
modelBuilder.Entity<Invoice>()
.HasOptional(invoice => invoice.ShipVia)
.WithMany()
.HasForeignKey(invoice => new { TheType = "S", invoice.ShipViaCode })
;
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
Any help would be appreciated.
Update #1
Ok, I reduced my code to its simplest form, and I followed the solution as provided by #GertArnold.
public abstract class ArCode {
[Column("cod_typ")]
public string CodeType { get; set; }
[Column("ar_cod")]
public string Code { get; set; }
[Column("terms_desc")]
public string TermsDescription { get; set; }
[Column("terms_typ")]
public string TermsType { get; set; }
[Column("shp_via_desc")]
public string ShipViaDescription { get; set; }
[Column("tax_desc")]
public string TaxDescription { get; set; }
}
public class TermsCode : ArCode { }
public class ShipViaCode : ArCode { }
public class Invoice {
[Column("pi_hist_hdr_invc_no"), Key]
public int InvoiceNumber { get; set; }
[Column("hdr_invc_dat")]
public DateTime InvoiceDate { get; set; }
[Column("shp_via_cod")]
public string ShipViaCode { get; set; }
public ShipViaCode ShipVia { get; set; }
[Column("terms_cod")]
public string TermsCode { get; set; }
public TermsCode Terms { get; set; }
public Invoice() {
}
}
public class PbsContext : DbContext {
public DbSet<Invoice> Invoices { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder) {
modelBuilder.Entity<Invoice>().ToTable("IHSHDR");
modelBuilder.Entity<ArCode>().HasKey(r => r.Code).ToTable("ARCODS");
modelBuilder.Entity<TermsCode>().Map(m => m.Requires("CodeType")
.HasValue("T").HasColumnType("varchar").HasMaxLength(1).IsRequired())
.ToTable("ARCODS");
modelBuilder.Entity<ShipViaCode>().Map(m => m.Requires("CodeType")
.HasValue("S").HasColumnType("varchar").HasMaxLength(1).IsRequired())
.ToTable("ARCODS");
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
public PbsContext()
: base("name=PbsDatabase") {
}
}
However, the following code returns an error:
PbsContext context = new PbsContext();
var invoice = context.Invoices.OrderByDescending(r => r.InvoiceDate).FirstOrDefault();
error 3032: Problem in mapping fragments starting at line 28:Condition member 'ArCode.cod_typ' with a condition other than 'IsNull=False' is mapped. Either remove the condition on ArCode.cod_typ or remove it from the mapping.
If I remove the "CodeType" column from the ArCode class and change all "CodeType" references to the database column name of "cod_typ" within the OnModelCreating event, then the statement above executes without error. However, invoice.ShipVia and invoice.Terms will both be null event though there is a matching record in the database.
Update #2
public abstract class ArCode {
[Column("ar_cod")]
public string Code { get; set; }
[Column("terms_desc")]
public string TermsDescription { get; set; }
[Column("terms_typ")]
public string TermsType { get; set; }
[Column("shp_via_desc")]
public string ShipViaDescription { get; set; }
[Column("tax_desc")]
public string TaxDescription { get; set; }
}
public class TermsCode : ArCode { }
public class ShipViaCode : ArCode { }
public class Invoice {
[Column("pi_hist_hdr_invc_no"), Key]
public int InvoiceNumber { get; set; }
[Column("hdr_invc_dat")]
public DateTime InvoiceDate { get; set; }
[Column("shp_via_cod")]
public ShipViaCode ShipVia { get; set; }
[Column("terms_cod")]
public TermsCode Terms { get; set; }
public Invoice() {
}
}
public class PbsContext : DbContext {
public DbSet<Invoice> Invoices { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder) {
modelBuilder.Entity<Invoice>().ToTable("IHSHDR");
modelBuilder.Entity<ArCode>().HasKey(r => r.Code).ToTable("ARCODS");
modelBuilder.Entity<TermsCode>().Map(m => m.Requires("CodeType")
.HasValue("T").HasColumnType("varchar").HasMaxLength(1).IsRequired())
.ToTable("ARCODS");
modelBuilder.Entity<ShipViaCode>().Map(m => m.Requires("CodeType")
.HasValue("S").HasColumnType("varchar").HasMaxLength(1).IsRequired())
.ToTable("ARCODS");
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
public PbsContext()
: base("name=PbsDatabase") {
}
}
Now, the following code returns an error:
PbsContext context = new PbsContext();
var invoice = context.Invoices.OrderByDescending(r => r.InvoiceDate).FirstOrDefault();
EntityCommandExecutionException - Invalid column name 'ShipVia_Code'. Invalid column name 'Terms_Code'.
What you want is impossible for EF. ArCode has a composite key, so any association to it will have to use two Properties. That means that in Invoice you'd need four properties (two pairs) to refer to the two ArCode objects. But two of these properties (those for CodeType) are not backed up by columns in the database, so EF can not map them.
But... there is a way that may help you out. You could create two derived classes from ArCode and let Invoice refer to those by single-property associations. But then you have to divert from the model as such and fool EF a bit by defining a single key:
public abstract class ArCode { ... } // abstract!
public class TermsCode : ArCode { }
public class ShipViaCode : ArCode { }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Invoice>().ToTable("IHSHDR");
modelBuilder.Entity<Invoice>().HasOptional(i => i.Terms).WithOptionalDependent().Map(m => m.MapKey("terms_cod"));
modelBuilder.Entity<Invoice>().HasOptional(i => i.ShipVia).WithOptionalDependent().Map(m => m.MapKey("shp_via_cod"));
modelBuilder.Entity<ArCode>().HasKey(a => a.Code).ToTable("ARCODS");
modelBuilder.Entity<TermsCode>().Map(m => m.Requires("CodeType")
.HasValue("T").HasColumnType("varchar").HasMaxLength(1).IsRequired())
.ToTable("ARCODS");
modelBuilder.Entity<ShipViaCode>().Map(m => m.Requires("CodeType")
.HasValue("S").HasColumnType("varchar").HasMaxLength(1).IsRequired())
.ToTable("ARCODS");
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
public class Invoice
{
[Column("pi_hist_hdr_invc_no"), Key]
public int InvoiceNumber { get; set; }
public ShipViaCode ShipVia { get; set; }
public TermsCode Terms { get; set; }
}
This may work for you if you don't have to insert ARCODS records through EF. It won't allow you to insert records with identical Codes, although the database would allow it. But I expect the content of ARCODS to be pretty stable and maybe it is enough to fill it with a script.
I build a model as below. The relationship between Recycler and Account is 1:1.
public class MyContext : DbContext
{
public DbSet<Quoter> Quoters { get; set; }
public DbSet<Account> Accounts { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Account>()
.HasRequired(a => a.RecyclerRef)
.WithRequiredDependent(r => r.AccountRef);
}
}
public class Quoter
{
public int QuoterId { get; set; }
public string Text { get; set; }
}
public class Recycler : Quoter
{
public string Description { get; set; }
public virtual Account AccountRef { get; set; }
}
public class Account
{
public int AccountId { get; set; }
public Recycler RecyclerRef { get; set; }
}
But, I get exceptions when I do the either of these queries:
var query1 = context.Quoters
.OfType<Recycler>()
.Include(r => r.AccountRef)
.Where(r => r.QuoterId == 1)
.ToList();
var query2 = context.Set<Recycler>()
.Include(r => r.AccountRef)
.Where(r => r.QuoterId == 1)
.ToList();
Exception shows that ResultType is “Transient.reference[POCOFirst.Quoter]”,but recommanded is “Transient.reference[POCOFirst.Recycler]”
If I remove the ToList(), it works well. But I need a list as the return value of method.
Why can't I do ToList()? Thanks
It looks like you have stumble upon this bug in EF. Another reference to the bug.
Workaround would be to remove the Include method.
I successfully mapped my complex type like this:
modelBuilder
.ComplexType<Name>()
.Property(name => name.First)
.HasColumnName("firstNameColumn");
modelBuilder
.ComplexType<Name>()
.Property(name => name.Last)
.HasColumnName("lastNameColumn");
So far so good. But notice that we do not specify any entity type. What if we want to map the same complext type also for a table with columns "firstN" and "lastN"? I tried EntityTypeConfiguration<> but you are not allowed to specify complex types there. Finally it looks like that complexTypes are defined globally.
You can also customize the complex type columns names at the entity level, like the following:
public class User
{
public int UserId { get; set; }
public Name NameInfo { get; set; }
}
public class Customer
{
public int CustomerId { get; set; }
public Name NameInfo { get; set; }
}
[ComplexType]
public class Name
{
public string First { get; set; }
public string Last { get; set; }
}
public class Context : DbContext
{
public DbSet<User> Users { get; set; }
public DbSet<Customer> Customers { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.ComplexType<Name>()
.Property(name => name.First)
.HasColumnName("firstNameColumn");
modelBuilder.ComplexType<Name>()
.Property(name => name.Last)
.HasColumnName("lastNameColumn");
// Here is how can customize the column names at the entity level:
modelBuilder.Entity<Customer>().Property(u => u.NameInfo.First)
.HasColumnName("firstN");
modelBuilder.Entity<Customer>().Property(u => u.NameInfo.Last)
.HasColumnName("lastN");
}
}
And the resultant schema will be:
Here you can find another example.
I'm creating a POCO model to use with entity framework code first CTP5. I'm using the decoration to make a property map to a PK column. But how can I define a PK on more then one column, and specifically, how can I control order of the columns in the index? Is it a result of the order of properties in the class?
Thanks!
NOTE:
As of 2019 this answer became non-valid for later EntityFramework versions.
You can specify the column order in the attributes, for instance:
public class MyEntity
{
[Key, Column(Order=0)]
public int MyFirstKeyProperty { get; set; }
[Key, Column(Order=1)]
public int MySecondKeyProperty { get; set; }
[Key, Column(Order=2)]
public string MyThirdKeyProperty { get; set; }
// other properties
}
If you are using the Find method of a DbSet you must take this order for the key parameters into account.
To complete the correct answer submitted by Slauma, you can use the HasKey method to specify an order for composite primary keys as well:
public class User
{
public int UserId { get; set; }
public string Username { get; set; }
}
public class Ctp5Context : DbContext
{
public DbSet<User> Users { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<User>().HasKey(u => new
{
u.UserId,
u.Username
});
}
}
If, like me, you prefer to use a configuration file you can do that in this way (based on Manavi's example):
public class User
{
public int UserId { get; set; }
public string Username { get; set; }
}
public class UserConfiguration : EntityTypeConfiguration<User>
{
public UserConfiguration()
{
ToTable("Users");
HasKey(x => new {x.UserId, x.Username});
}
}
Obviously you have to add the configuration file to your context:
public class Ctp5Context : DbContext
{
public DbSet<User> Users { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Configurations.Add(new UserConfiguration());
}
}
Use as a anonymous object:
modelBuilder.Entity<UserExamAttemptQuestion>().ToTable("Users").HasKey(o => new { o.UserId, o.Username });