Spent a lot of time, but still cann't understand how to avoid caching in DbContext.
I attached below entity model of some easy case to demonstrate what I mean.
The problem is that dbcontext caching results. For example, I have next code for querying data from my database:
using (TestContext ctx = new TestContext())
{
var res = (from b in ctx.Buildings.Where(x => x.ID == 1)
select new
{
b,
flats = from f in b.Flats
select new
{
f,
people = from p in f.People
where p.Archived == false
select p
}
}).AsEnumerable().Select(x => x.b).Single();
}
In this case, everything is fine: I got what I want (Only persons with Archived == false).
But if I add another query after it, for example, query for buildings that have people that have Archived flag set to true, I have next things, that I really cann't understand:
my previous result, that is res, will be added by data (there
will be added Persons with Archived == true too)
new result will contain absolutely all Person's, no matter what Archived equals
the code of this query is next:
using (TestContext ctx = new TestContext())
{
var res = (from b in ctx.Buildings.Where(x => x.ID == 1)
select new
{
b,
flats = from f in b.Flats
select new
{
f,
people = from p in f.People
where p.Archived == false
select p
}
}).AsEnumerable().Select(x => x.b).Single();
var newResult = (from b in ctx.Buildings.Where(x => x.ID == 1)
select new
{
b,
flats = from f in b.Flats
select new
{
f,
people = from p in f.People
where p.Archived == true
select p
}
}).AsEnumerable().Select(x => x.b).Single();
}
By the way, I set LazyLoadingEnabled to false in constructor of TestContext.
Does anybody know how to workaround this problem? How can I have in my query what I really write in my linq to entity?
P.S. #Ladislav may be you can help?
You can use the AsNoTracking method on your query.
var res = (from b in ctx.Buildings.Where(x => x.ID == 1)
select new
{
b,
flats = from f in b.Flats
select new
{
f,
people = from p in f.People
where p.Archived == false
select p
}
}).AsNoTracking().AsEnumerabe().Select(x => x.b).Single();
I also want to note that your AsEnumerable is probably doing more harm than good. If you remove it, the Select(x => x.b) will be translated to SQL. As is, you are selecting everything, then throwing away everything but x.b in memory.
have you tried something like:
ctx.Persons.Where(x => x.Flat.Building.Id == 1 && x.Archived == false);
===== EDIT =====
In this case I think you approach is, imho, really hazardous. Indeed you works on the data loaded by EF to interpret your query rather than on data resulting of the interpretation of your query. If one day EF changes is loading policy (for example with a predictive pre-loading) your approach will "send you in then wall".
For your goal, you will have to eager load the data you need to build your "filterd" entity. That is select the building, then foreach Flat select the non archived persons.
Another solution is to use too separate contexts in an "UnitOfWork" like design.
Related
I want to have my EfCore query translated into the following SQL query:
select
c.blablabla
from
codes c
left join lookups l on c.codeId = l.entityid and l.languageCode = <variable - language code of current thread> and l.lookuptype = 'CODE'
where
..something..
order by
l.displayname
Note: tables 'codes' and 'lookups' are not connected! 'lookups' contains a lot of different lookup data in different languages!
I am stuck into limitations of EfCore (like 'NavigationExpandingExpressionVisitor' failed). I don't want to make in-memory filtering, it looks silly to me... Am I missing something obvious?
In perspective, I'd like to make universal method to help sort by displayname (or other lookup name) for different kind of entities - not only codes.
Seems like I figured it out. If there's a better approach - please let me know:
protected override IQueryable<FixCode> SortByDisplayName(IQueryable<FixCode> queryable, string languageCode = null)
{
return queryable
.GroupJoin(
DbContext.FixCodeValues.Where(x =>
x.DomainId == CentralToolConsts.Domains.CENTRAL_TOOLS
&& x.CodeName == CentralToolsFieldTypes.CODE_ORIGIN
&& (x.LanguageCode == languageCode || x.LanguageCode == CentralToolsDbLanguageCodes.English)),
//TODO: this will be a 'selector' parameter
code => code.CodeOriginId,
codeOrigin => codeOrigin.StringValue,
(c, co) => new
{
Code = c,
CodeOrigin = co
}
)
.SelectMany(
x => x.CodeOrigin.DefaultIfEmpty(),
(x, codeOrigin) => new { Code = x.Code, CodeOrigin = codeOrigin }
)
.OrderBy(x => x.CodeOrigin.ShortName)
.Select(x => x.Code);
}
Good evening. Is it possible to combine multiple IQueryable into a single one without using Union in EF Core 2? The main problem is that it doesn't allow to use methods like .Union(), .Except() etc.
It's important that IQueryable should be executed as a single query.
This is what I want to get: toCreateSubquery.Union(toDeleteSubquery)
The queries I want to combine are listed below.
var toCreateSubquery =
validLinks
.Where(
rl => !existingLinks.Any(
el => el.Contract == rl.Contract && el.Estate == rl.Estate)) // Except() doesn't work'
.Select(x => new {x.Contract, x.Estate, Type = ActionType.Create});
var toDeleteSubquery =
existingLinks
.Where(el => !validLinks.Any(rl => el.Contract == rl.Contract && el.Estate == rl.Estate))
.Select(x => new {x.Contract, x.Estate, Type = ActionType.Delete});
This is the visualization of the problem I'm solving.
I want to get the union of these sets without intersection and be able to distinguish belonging to one of these sets.
Just in case, I attach the code of getting these sets:
var validLinks = from ac in _context.AreaContracts
from e in _context.Estate
where (from al in e.AreaLinks select al.Area.Id).Contains(ac.Area.Id) ||
e.Geometry.Intersects(
ac.Area.Geometry)
select new { Contract = ac.Contract.Id, Estate = e.Id };
var existingLinks = from sd in _context.SquareDistributions
select new { Contract = sd.Contract.Id, Estate = sd.Estate.Id };
Thank you for your attention.
I am trying to add a note to my event object. I am getting an error using this code
Note noteToAdd = new Note { State = State.Added, NoteText = note };
Patient patient = context.Patients.Find(patientId);
patient.State = State.Modified;
patient.MobilePatient.State = State.Modified;
patient.MobilePatient.MCalmEvents.Find(e => e.Id == eventid).Note = noteToAdd;
context.ApplyStateChanges();
Is there a better way to do it using Linq To Entity?
The error that I am having is :
{"Invalid column name 'Note_Id'."}
and the SQl that is being generated is a SELECT instead of INSERT.
Thank you
but your map shows a one-to-many relation between Note and Event...
all of your code remain as they are, but instead of this line :
patient.MobilePatient.MCalmEvents.Find(e => e.Id == eventid).Note = noteToAdd;
replace these lines:
noteToAdd.EventID = oEvent.ID; // replace field names, to exactly what they are;
context.Note.Add(noteToAdd);
var oEvent = patient.MobilePatient.MCalmEvents.Find(e => e.Id == eventid);
oEvent.NoteID = noteToAdd.ID; // replace field names, to exactly what they are;
also i think if you don`t write these two:
var oEvent = patient.MobilePatient.MCalmEvents.Find(e => e.Id == eventid);
oEvent.NoteID = noteToAdd.ID; // replace field names, to exactly what they are;
there is not any problem, i`m not sure
According to your map, Event entity has a list of Note as navigation property, and i think you should add to this collection instead, what you write in this line:
patient.MobilePatient.MCalmEvents.Find(e => e.Id == eventid).Note = noteToAdd;
i think should be like this:
patient.MobilePatient.MCalmEvents.Find(e => e.Id == eventid).Add(noteToAdd);
in addition, what kind of error you get ? can you explain your error ?
are sure there is no add method on Event navigation property
why don`t you try to add note from context directly? like:
context.Note.Add(noteToAdd);
I have something like this:
var tmp =_forumsDb.Threads
.Where(t => t.Id == variable)
.Select(t => new { Thread = t, Posts = t.Posts.Take(1) })
.Single();
Now, i expect tmp.Thread.Posts.Count(); to be 1, but it takes all posts that i have in database. Is it possible to use projection that takes explicit amount of posts, do it in a single query without turning off lazy loading?
Edit:
I tried doing something like this, but it does not work either:
var tmp =_forumsDb.Threads
.Where(t => t.Id == variable)
.Select(t => new { Thread = t, Posts = t.Posts.OrderBy(p => p.DateCreated).Take(1) })
.Select(t => t.Thread)
.Single();
tmp.Thread.Posts is the navigation property for which lazy loading is configured. Since it isn't yet loaded, accessing it loads all the remaining posts.
tmp.Posts is not a navigation property. That's the one you should be able to access without triggering another query.
I asked a question about this previously but my database structure has changed, and while it made other things simpler, now this part is more complicated. Here is the previous question.
At the time, my EF Context had a UsersProjects object because there were other properties. Now that I've simplified that table, it is just the keys, so all my EF context knows about is Users and Projects and the M2M relationship between them. There is no more UsersProjects as far as EF knows.
So my goal is to say "show me all the users who are working on projects with me."
in SQL, this would go something like:
SELECT * FROM Users INNER JOIN UsersProjects ON Users.ID=UsersProjects.UserID
WHERE ProjectID IN (SELECT ProjectID FROM UsersProjects WHERE UserID=#UserID)
and I started in EF with something like this:
var myProjects =
(from p in edmx.Projects
where p.Users.Contains(edmx.Users.FirstOrDefault(u => u.Email == UserEmail))
orderby p.Name
select p).ToList();
var associatedUsers =
(from u in edmx.Users
where myProjects.Contains(?????????)
//where myProjects.Any(????????)
select u);
The trick is finding what to put in the ????????. Anyone help here?
var me = context
.Users
.First(user => user.Email = "me#example.com");
// Note that there is no call to ToList() or AsEnumerable().
var myProjects = context
.Projects
.Where(project => project.Users.Contains(me));
var associatedUsers = context
.Users
.Where(user => myProjects.Any(project => user.Project.Contains(project)));
But there are several other possible solutions. For example
var associatedUsers = myProjects
.SelectMany(project => project.Users)
.Distinct();
which I would prefer.
Further note that it is much easier to obtain myProjects using a navigation property instead of using Contains().
var myProjects = me.Projects;
Daniel, I tried what you had and ran into some issues. Can you explain what these errors mean?
I tried:
// Doesn't work.
using (var edmx = new MayflyEntities())
{
var me = edmx.Users.First(user => user.Email == UserEmail);
var myProjects = edmx.Projects.Where(project => project.Users.Contains(me));
var associatedUsers = myProjects.SelectMany(project => project.Users).Distinct();
}
but got the two following exceptions:
Unable to create a constant value of type 'DomainModel.User'. Only primitive types ('such as Int32, String, and Guid') are supported in this context.
and
The ObjectContext instance has been disposed and can no longer be used for operations that require a connection.
So, I moved some things around and this works fine, but now I'm curious as to why? In SQL Profiler, it all executes in one query, so why does it show that the context has been disposed? Also, why can it not use the me object instead of the lambda?
// Works fine
var edmx = new MayflyEntities();
var myProjects = edmx.Projects.Where(project => project.Users.Contains(edmx.Users.First(user => user.Email == UserEmail)));
var associatedUsers = myProjects.SelectMany(project => project.Users).Distinct();