We are currently rewriting an existing internal ASP.NET Web Forms application. Our application consists of a Web Api back end which uses Entity Framework 6 for data access and an front end which uses AngularJS.
We have an existing large database that I've created EF models using the Code-First Using Existing Database method and we are using data transfer object classes as inputs/outputs to our API methods so we aren't directly exposing our model classes. So basically, I'm trying to become proficient with EF, Web Api and AngularJS all at the same time. For the most part I'm fairly comfortable with the latter two, but for EF I haven't completely gotten comfortable with. I've watched a lot of the videos on Microsoft Virtual Academy but this is the first time I've had some hands-on experience with it.
We've been working on this application for a few months and so far we've only had to work with CRUD operations on our entities (POCO DTO's) which are flat objects with simple properties. However, we've finally come across some situations where we need to deal not only with our classes, but properties which are classes themselves; a parent-child relationship.
Therefore, I have the following questions:
I see that when we have a proper foreign key relationship in our DB, that virtual properties are created in EF, which from what I recall are to support lazy-loading. However, lazy-loading isn't really feasible in this environment where we are using web services (Web Api). Our object model does allow for some really large hierarchy of classes where a fully populated object and its children would mean a large amount of data would be passed around when that really isn't necessary, so in most cases a first level object is all we need. In some cases however, we do want to populate child classes, so my question is how do we do that, and where do we do that? I've looked at the automatically-generated code in the DB Context but we have also used scaffolded code to create our controllers. Which place do we need to do this? I've seen code samples showing how do to this but it hasn't said specifically where this code lies. It appears to be within a controller but I could be wrong.
If we do allow for 2- or more level hierarchy of objects, does EF automatically handle operations (updates, deletes, etc.) -- for example, if we have a "Company" object which has a collection of "Customer" objects, and we delete the "Company" object, do the related "Customer" objects get deleted too? Also, is a multi-step operation like that automatically performed within a transaction or do we need to explicitly set that up?
If I modify a model class or the DB context, seeing as this code is automatically-generated, that's generally bad practice as my changes could be overwritten, so I am assuming the controller code is where I want to make my changes. I am aware of database migrations but I have no experience with them and I am sure I'll need to use them at some point because I am fairly confident that our database may not have all the foreign key relationships necessary for EF to do everything we need at the moment.
I know this is a long post, but if anyone can give some guidance on how to do some of these things because it's not only me that's having to deal with this but I have two other developers on my team who are working on this project and we are all as inexperienced with this as the others are. Thanks
For the purpose of sending data across a web service, I'd suggest creating a DTO to hold the data you want to send and mapping your entities to the DTO instead of trying to send the entities themselves in your payload. It also protects your API from changes to your entity.
Cascading deletes are configurable, iirc, but I'm not 100% sure what the default is. Transactions are generally not implicit, so you will want to use those where you require them.
Not exactly sure what you are asking here. In general, how your entities/tables change depends on if you are using database-first or code-first. If you are using database-first (you will have a .edmx file in your solution that has the model matching your schema), you just update the SQL directly and update your entity model via the .edmx. If you use code-first, you will change the entities how you want them and run a database migration to update your database to match.
MSDN article about code-first migration: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/data/jj591621.aspx
Related
We are currently looking at migrating from WCF Data Services to WebApiOData. The problem that I see is that we have to create a method within a webApi controller for every single table/view that we have that we need to query from the client. The entity model is defined in an edmx with quite a few tables. Having one standard odata.svc that just allowed us to add a table to the edmx and just query it straight through the odata.svc was gold, having to add a method every time we add a view or table to the edmx will be a nightmare and if we are talking about > 50 tables/views it will just turn into a mess of methods everywhere.
Is there a simpler strategy for just having one controller that defines a global get method that we can just query on for all tables/views in the edmx? Or am I needing to create methods for everything?
RESTier is a layer of abstraction over Web API OData that should feel similar in ways to WCF Data Services, but still allow the flexibility of Web API OData. It already has an EF provider so ideally you should be up and running within minutes with a very small amount of code. Whether it works or doesn't work, we'd love to hear about your experience either in the comments on the GitHub pages or at odatafeedback#microsoft.com.
What I'd LIKE to do is manipulate EF to support plugins that access a shared database. So the database would contain all of the tables for the main application plus all of the tables required for each plugin. As the application doesn't know anything about the plugin data structures, it cannot be responsible for their management. The plugins are solely responsible, and create the tables themselves. However, the plugins know about the host application and its data structures, so ideally should be able to reference them and even inherit from them, resulting in a database that is extensible yet able to implement optimized patterns.
In EF, this translates to a HostContext that contains the DbSets appropriate for the Host. Each Plugin, I thought, should have a PluginContext that inherits from HostContext that contains the DbSets needed by the plugin. The entity classes included in PluginContext would then be able to reference HostContext entities, and/or inherit from those entities, and EF would be able to resolve the table mapping and relationships.
I'm using EF6. When I attempt the above and try to list the single entity I've included in the PluginContext, an exception is thrown complaining that the entity doesn't exist. Sure enough, no matching table has been created.
Is what I'm attempting to do supported by EF? If so, what am I doing wrong?
As I mentioned here: EF6 Empty Model target string
I began this effort using Rowan Miller's example here: http://romiller.com/2013/02/15/extending-and-customizing-code-first-models-part-2-of-2/
In the end, I abandoned that approach, for a few reasons: 1) I couldn't get it to work (I can't remember exactly why but I do suspect it was related to differences in EF since the article was written), and 2) I didn't like the need to write manual migrations.
I ended up with PluginContexts that inherit from HostContext, as I had hoped, and am able to reference and even inherit from host entities. This has restrictions in its use though:
My plugin logic is completely self contained. I have no need for the host application to manipulate or create plugin entities. Therefore, I am not trying to get the system to subsitute any plugin entities for host entities. If construction of a particular entity subclass is required, then a plugin method must be provided for that and an inheritence hiearchy will be utilized.
Migrations can be built even on the plugin context as per normal. However, that migration may easily include migration code from the Host Context. So I have to remember to look for and remove these instructions. This is typically very straightforward and I believe is much less effort than building the equivalent from scratch.
If there is any change to the Host Context then this must be reflected in every Plugin Context. Basically, this means anytime a new migration is created to reflect changes in Host Context, migrations must be created for each plugin as well, even though that migration may be empty (it isn't really - the critical part here is updating the Model in the latest MigrationHistory record to reflect the Plugin model that has been changed because of the inherited Host model).
This approach is being used to extend an in-house application with in-house plugins, and so may not be as easy to adopt in other scenarios which Rowan's solution is probably better suited.
I have an architectural question about EF and WCF.
We are developing a three-tier application using Entity Framework (with an Oracle database), and a GUI based on WPF. The GUI communicates with the server through WCF.
Our data model is quite complex (more than a hundred tables), with lots of relations. We are currently using the default EF code generation template, and we are having a lot of trouble with tracking the state of our entities.
The user interfaces on the client are also fairly complex, sometimes an object graph with more than 50 objects are sent down to a single user interface, with several layers of aggregation between the entities. It is an important goal to be able to easily decide in the BLL layer, which of the objects have been modified on the client, and which objects have been newly created.
What would be the clearest approach to manage entities and entity states between the two layers? Self tracking entities? What are the most common pitfalls in this scenario?
Could those who have used STEs in a real production environment tell their experiences?
STEs are supposed to solve this scenario but they are not silver bullet. I have never used them in real project (I don't like them) but I spent some time playing with them. The main pitfalls I found are:
Coupling your data layer with your client application - you must share entity assembly between projects (it also means it is .NET only solution but it should not be a problem in your case)
Large data transfers - you pass 50 entities to clients, client change single entity and you will pass 50 entities back. It will require some fighting with STEs to avoid passing unnecessary data
Unnecessary updates to database - normally when EF works with attached entities it track changes on property level but with STEs it track changes on entity level. So if user modify single property in entity with 100 properties it will generate update with setting all of them. It will require modifying template and adding property level change tracking to avoid this.
Client application should use STEs directly (binding STEs to UI) to get most of its self tracking ability. Otherwise you will have to implement code which will move data from UI back to self tracking entity and modify its state.
They are not proxied = they don't support lazy loading (in case of WCF service it is good behavior)
I described today the way to solve this without STEs. There is also related question about tracking over web services (check #Richard's answer and provided links).
We have developed a layered application with STE's. A user interface layer with ASP.NET and ModelViewPresenter, a business layer, a WCF service layer and the data layer with Entity Framework.
When I first read about STE's the documentation said that they are easier then using custom DTO's. They should be the 'quick and easy way' and that only on really big projects you should use hand written DTO's.
But we've run in a lot of problems using STE's. One of the main problems is that if your entities come from multiple service calls (for example in a master detail view) and so from different contexts you will run into problems when composing the graphs on the server and trying to save them. So our server function still have to check manually which data has changed and then recompose the object graph on the server. A lot has been written about this topic but it's still not easy to fix.
Another problem we ran into was that the STE's wouldn't work without WCF. The change tracking is activated when the entities are serialized. We've originally designed an architecture where WCF could be disabled and the service calls would just be in process (this was a requirement for our unit tests, which would run a lot faster without wcf and be easier to setup). It turned out that STE's are not the right choice for this.
I've also noticed that developers sometimes included a lot of data in their query and just send it to the client instead of really thinking about which data they needed.
After this project we've decided to use custom DTO's with automapper from server to client and use the POCO template in our data layer in a new project.
So since you already state that your project is big I would opt for custom DTO's and service functions that are a specifically created for one goal instead of 'Update(Person person)' functions that send a lot of data
Hope this helps :)
So I was reading about Entity Framework and based on my agile development scenario I decided to go with POCO objects.
But now I'm having some extra problems I don't know how to get away with.
I'm working with RIA services and Silverlight so when I'm going to Save an object of the server side I have to attach the object to an ObjectContext. The thing is that I must then change the ObjectState to Added or Modified.
So my question is what's the best approach to really know what state to change it to. I saw in Julia Lerman's book that she uses a State attribute in her POCO objects and she takes care managing that state on the client side before sending the object to the server. That state then is used to change the real EntitySate once attached.
I've also seen other samples where the Insert implementation checks on the Key of the Entity (object) to know whether it is new or not. For example, if ProjectId in my Project entity is 0 (zero) I know it has to be a new object.
To be honest I don't like any of those approaches because in both cases my developers have to do some extra-work to actually save the object.
I'd like the know pros and cons of both solutions and hopefully a new (better) solution I'm still not seing.
You can still have self tracking entities and poco. In visual studio if you search the community templates there is a self tracking poco template. this is what you want to use. If you can find the template look for your entities using Ientitywithobjecttracker.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd456848.aspx
HI Guys,
I was watching these videos series about Entity Framework:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/data/ff191186.aspx
is that easy building application in real world programming??? and is it ....reliable...has good performance...
"I am a graduate.."
thanks
Entity Framework is a valid real world data access tool. It is very easy to get up and running with EF. You simply import (or create in EF 4) your data model. You then can rename it to make it more code friendly. And then you are off querying databases.
Performance
I have been on multiple projects that use it, some which require high throughput, others that have low performance requirements. Entity Framework out of the box is not the fastest solution in the world, so there are a lot of performance tweaks that have to go on, but its all do able.
Reliability
We never have issues with reliability. We have never had an issue with EF in general, its always data content related. Trying to insert duplicated data, etc.
Other Tangibles
EF follows a pattern which allows for you to do some fun stuff with templates and abstract classes. All entities inerit from a class, entities that have references inherit from other classes. All Entity Contexts inherit from ;) ObjectContext classes, which provide a base set of functionality that allows you to create generic DAO implementations that can be reused throughout the enterprise.
If you are using UI dev, you can also use Data Services that wrap EF, as a fast gateway to your databse. The only downside of this is that you dont have access to the full suite of the Entity Framework.