EF Code First keyless association - entity-framework

I've got a database that I control part of and have no control over another part. I'd like to use EF to access both parts, but I'm having trouble declaring some of the relationships. Consider the following two entities:
public class AnswerSet {
public AnswerSet() { WeeklyAnswerSets=new HashSet<WeeklyAnswerSet>(); }
public int Id { get; set; }
public string StudentCode { get; set; }
public string InstructorCode { get; set; }
public string AssignedDateOrig { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<WeeklyAnswerSet> WeeklyAnswerSets { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<INSTSTUD> InstStuds { get; set; }
}
public class INSTSTUD {
[Key]
public int FOCLIST { get; set; }
public string ININSCD { get; set; }
public string INSTUCD { get; set; }
public string ASSIGNEDDATE { get; set; }
}
I can control AnswerSet but not INSTSTUD. And INSTSTUD.FOCLIST will not be usable as a permanent foreign key in AnswerSet. Instead, if I want to look up an INSTSTUD from an AnswerSet, I'll need to use a join like this: StudentCode=INSTUCD and InstructorCode=ININSCD and AssignedDateOrig=ASSIGNEDDATE.
So given these constraints, what can I put in OnModelCreating so that my navigation property AnswerSet.InstStuds will work?

Short answer, is you can't. If you don't have a permanent primary key, then you can't use a navigation property. You will have to do your joins manually, and hope there are no key violations.

Related

The entity type 'Program' requires a primary key to be defined

I am trying to make a simple website that tracks students, programs, and classes. I've created the entities and I'm getting an error when trying to add the migration.
"The entity type 'Program' requires a primary key to be defined."
I have tried using the [Key] attribute and there is an Id field. The other table was created just fine. What else should I try?
Here is the problem class:
public class Program
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public bool UseRanks { get; set; }
}
Here is another table that I had no problems creating a migration for:
public class Person
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
public string CellPhone { get; set; }
public string HomePhone { get; set; }
public string WorkPhone { get; set; }
public string Address { get; set; }
public string City { get; set; }
public string State { get; set; }
public string ZipCode { get; set; }
public DateTime BirthDate { get; set; }
}
Here is what is in my ApplicationDbContext class:
public class ApplicationDbContext : IdentityDbContext
{
public ApplicationDbContext(DbContextOptions<ApplicationDbContext> options)
: base(options)
{
}
//public DbSet<Attendance> Attendances { get; set; }
public DbSet<Person> People { get; set; }
public DbSet<Bill> Bills { get; set; }
//public DbSet<Session> Sessions { get; set; }
public DbSet<Program> Programs { get; set; }
}
I've commented out the other entities because I was trying to add them one at a time. Trying to add a migration with all the entities resulted in the same error with the same specific class.
Complete shot in the dark, but based on the name of this class, I'm guessing you're referencing the wrong Program. Make sure that your DbSet<Program> is actually using your Program entity and not something like the Program class used at the console app level. You'll likely need to explicitly use the namespace, i.e. DbSet<MyApp.Models.Program>.
You might also consider changing the name of the class to remove any chance of ambiguity. There's some class names that are just going to wreck havoc trying to use them because they'll conflict with framework stuff constantly. It's usually more hassle than it's worth just to have that particular name. Program is one of those.
You can try to use this way:
public class Program
{
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public bool UseRanks { get; set; }
}
Adding [Key] attribute to the Id property.
In the file ApplicationDbContext.cs, you can override OnModelCreating method:
public DbSet<Program> Programs { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder builder)
{
base.OnModelCreating(builder);
builder.Entity<Program>().ToTable("Programs").HasKey(x => x.Id);
}

Map many to many objects using Entity Framework

For example we have profile and organisation. Both have articles.
public class Article
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
}
public class Profile
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Email { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Article> Articles { get; set; }
}
public class Organisation
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Article> Articles { get; set; }
}
In this way Article should have two kinds of parent so it should have something like parent type to be able to access a parent when you select articles directly.
public class Article
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public int ParentId { get; set; }
public ArticleParentType Parent { get; set; }
}
Is it possible to map it using Entity Framework?
Is it a good idea to do it?
What is the best practice for storing this kind of data?
public class Article
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public int ParentId { get; set; }
public ArticleParentType Parent { get; set; }
}
Is it possible to map it using Entity Framework?
Is it a good idea to do it?
Possible yes but not a good idea. The underlying Database can't use a foreign key for Parentid. It would be slow.
What is the best practice for storing this kind of data?
A simple approach, with 2 Nullable parents and without CascadeOnDelete:
public class Article
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public virtual Profile Profile { get; set; }
public virtual Organisation Organisation { get; set; }
}
Alternatively you could use inheritance for Article, ie class OrganisationArticle : Article {}

How do i create One-to-One mapping in EF 6 using Data Annotation approach

I am using EF 6.1.1.
I am unable to figure out how to create One-to-One relationship between two classes/tables with both entities have their owns PKs. I originally posted question link but could not get much help on it OR i am not able to get it. So, here i am putting my question in simple way.
Appreciate if someone can share thoughts on it.
My Requirement:
I would like create One-To-One relationship between Principle and Dependant with 'Id' from Principle class acts as Foreign Key in dependant class.
Principle Class
public class Student
{
public string FullName {get; set;}
}
Dependant Class
public class StudentReport
{
public string RollNumber { get; set; }
public string StudentType { get; set; }
}
Add PKs – EF requires this:
public class Student
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FullName { get; set; }
}
public class StudentReport
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string RollNumber { get; set; }
public string StudentType { get; set; }
}
Note that EF 5 and later supports naming conventions: Id indicates a primary key. Alternately, it also supports the name of the class followed by "Id", so the above keys could have been StudentId for Student and StudentReportId for StudentReport, if you wished.
Add the foreign relation as a navigation property to at least one of the tables – in this case, you stated that StudentReport is the dependent, so let's add it to that one:
public class Student
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FullName { get; set; }
}
public class StudentReport
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string RollNumber { get; set; }
public string StudentType { get; set; }
public Student Student { get; set; }
}
Again – by naming convention – EF determines that a single Student property on StudentReport indicates that this is a navigational property associated with a foreign key. (By defining only the Student property, but no foreign key property, you are indicating that you don't care what EF names the associated FK ... basically, you're indicating you'll always access the related Student via the property.)
If you did care about the name of the FK property, you could add it:
public class Student
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FullName { get; set; }
}
public class StudentReport
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string RollNumber { get; set; }
public string StudentType { get; set; }
public int StudentId { get; set; }
public Student Student { get; set; }
}
Again – by naming convention – EF determines that StudentId is the FK associated with the Student property because it has the class name, "Student", followed by "Id".
All of this, so far, has been using conventions as defined in Entity Framework Code First Conventions, but Data Annotations are also an option, if you wish:
public class Student
{
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FullName { get; set; }
}
public class StudentReport
{
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string RollNumber { get; set; }
public string StudentType { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Student")]
public int StudentId { get; set; }
public Student Student { get; set; }
}
Doing this is actually a good idea, because it makes clearer your intent to other programmers that might not be aware of EF Conventions – but can easily infer them from simply looking at EF Data Annotations – and is still less cumbersome than Fluent API.
UPDATE
I just realized, I left this as a one-to-many, with enforcement of the one-to-one relationship being left to do in the code using this model. To enforce the one-to-one in the model, you could add a navigation property to the Student class going the other way:
public class Student
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FullName { get; set; }
public StudentReport StudentReport { get; set; }
}
public class StudentReport
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string RollNumber { get; set; }
public string StudentType { get; set; }
public Student Student { get; set; }
}
However, that's going to break, because EF doesn't know which entity to insert first on an add. To indicate which is dependent, you have to specific that the dependent class' PK is the FK to the principal class (this enforces one-to-one because – in order for a Student/StudentReport pair to be associated – their Id properties must be the exact same value):
public class Student
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FullName { get; set; }
public StudentReport StudentReport { get; set; }
}
public class StudentReport
{
[ForeignKey("Student")]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string RollNumber { get; set; }
public string StudentType { get; set; }
public Student Student { get; set; }
}
or, using the full set of Data Annotations from earlier:
public class Student
{
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FullName { get; set; }
public StudentReport StudentReport { get; set; }
}
public class StudentReport
{
[Key, ForeignKey("Student")]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string RollNumber { get; set; }
public string StudentType { get; set; }
public Student Student { get; set; }
}

EF Code first : set optional one to one relationship with data annotation

I've the following situation I try to solve : I've 2 tables, a Course table with some fields and a CourseDescription table which is optional (so Course may have a CourseDescription but CourseDescription must have a Course). I'm trying to set this up. So far, here's what I have :
public class Course
{
[Key, Column("Key_Course")]
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual CourseDescription CourseDescription { get; set; }
}
public class CourseDescription
{
[Key, ForeignKey("Course")]
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public string PreRequis { get; set; }
public int CoursesID { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CoursesID")]
public Course Course { get; set; }
}
This "works" meaning that EF doesn't complains about my model but the relation is not properly done because EF associate the PK of CourseDescription with the PK of Course. In my database, this is not the case (ex : CourseDescription.ID=1 is associated with CourseDescription.CoursesID=3, not 1).
Is there a way to fix that with data annotation ? I know I can use the fluent API but I don't want to override the model building just for that (unless there's no other way).
Thanks
Well, I think you have two choices:
Configure an one to many relationship
If you want to map the FK of the relationship between Course and CourseDescription, and you don't want to declare that FK property as Key of the CourseDescription entity, then, you don't have other choice that configure an one-to-many relationship. In that case your model would be like this:
public class Course
{
[Key, Column("Key_Course")]
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<CourseDescription> CourseDescriptions { get; set;}
}
public class CourseDescription
{
[Key]
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public string PreRequis { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Course")]
public int CourseID { get; set; }
public Course Course { get; set; }
}
Configure an one-to-one relationship but not map the FK of the
relationship
The only way that EF lets you map the FK in an one-to-one relationship is when the FK is declared as a PK too, so if you want to have diferent Ids in both entities and you want to stablish an one-to-one relationship, then you could do something like this:
public class Course
{
[Key, Column("Key_Course")]
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public CourseDescription CourseDescription { get; set;}
}
public class CourseDescription
{
[Key]
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public string PreRequis { get; set; }
[Required]
public Course Course { get; set; }
}
And work with the navigations properties.
It looks like you should not use ForeignKey attribute for ID property of CourseDescription class as you don't want to have an association between primary keys. Try to remove it.
Edit: It looks like I misunderstood the question previous time.
You can have your CourseDescription this way.
public class CourseDescription
{
[Key, ForeignKey("Course")]
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public string PreRequis { get; set; }
public Course Course { get; set; }
}
In this case you don't need to have CoursesID field. Entities will be connected by primary keys.

breeze.js one to many

I'm currently building an SPA with Web API and knockout etc. So far i worte my own simple datacontext and it worked pretty well.
The I bumped in to breeze and thought it might be worth a try. especially I hoped to get a simpler approach on navigation between the entities...
to load a entities or a single entity with breeze worked fine. Working with navigation properties seems not to work. The navigation property is always empty, even though it's a one to many relationship.
Here is my model (simplified):
public class WorkdayHours
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public bool IsWorkDay { get; set; }
...
public Byte WeekDay { get; set; }
}
public class Service
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string DisplayName { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<WorkdayHours> BookableDays { get; set; }
}
public class Employee
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string DisplayName { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<WorkdayHours> BookableDays { get; set; }
}
public class Shop
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string DisplayName { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<WorkdayHours> BookableDays { get; set; }
}
Then I fetch the entity service ind my SPA as follow:
var query = EntityQuery
.from('Services')
.where('id', 'eq', serviceId)
.expand('BookableDays');
As when teh query is executed I get as result the requested service entity with all the data except the bookableDay property is always an empty array.
When I check the Json answer I see that also the workdayHours are transmitted and breeze even calls my defined ctors for this entities. However they are not linked to the bookableDays property itself.
When checking the genrated DB model, EF generated foreignkeys for service, employee and shop in workdayHours as expected.
Is breeze not capable with having several optional foreignkeys?
Suggestion and ideas highly apprechiated.
Breeze is dependent on Foreign Keys. I had a similar problem. This should solve it:
EF was generating the ForeignKeys for me too and the related Entites where still empty. As far as i know breeze needs the explicit Annotation/Configuration of ForeignKey Fields.
public class Mvl
{
[Key, DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
public long MvlId{ get; set; }
public DateTime CreatedAt { get; set; }
[InverseProperty("Mvl")]
public ICollection<MvlOP> MvlOps { get; set; }
public DateTime? ReleasedAt { get; set; }
public DateTime? LockedAt { get; set; }
public DateTime? ClosedAt { get; set; }
//[ConcurrencyCheck]
//public int? RowVersion { get; set; }
[Timestamp]
public byte[] TimeStamp { get; set; }
}
public class MvlOP
{
[Key, DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
public long MvlOpId { get; set; }
public long MvlId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("MvlId")]
public Mvl Mvl { get; set; }
...
}