I’m considering using Entity Framework for a project. I’m trying to understand how I can configure EF to work with a database environment that is configured with a read server and a write server.
All updates to the write server will be replicated over to the read servers.
My questions are:
Do I need to generate different data models for the two environments?
Can I reuse the same data model?
Is there something built into EF itself that will allow for this?
Thanks
You can reuse the same model because you can instantiate an ObjectContext with any connection string you like. AFAIK you can even switch out the connection later, so you can use two different server connections with the same EntityContext.
If the data models are identical, then no.
Du to #1 being no, #2 is automatically yes.
EF just requires you pass it a different connection string
However...
I'm not really sure how you intend to make this work. You will lose virtually benefit of an ORM, you can't do change tracking, and you will have a lot of problems not reading from the write model.
Frankly, I'm not sure how you could make this work with any ORM.
Related
My company's main software application hasn't been updated in twenty years. I expect to soon be working on a complete rewrite of it. To that end, I am beginning to work my way through the book "Pro ASP.Net Core 3" by Adam Freeman (8th edition).
Our application was written to be independent of specific database types. Most of our customers use PostgreSQL, but a few use SQL Server. Therefore, we use ODBC because ODBC drivers exist for both of those databases, as well as several others. The application does not do anything fancy with the databases, and ODBC works well. We configure an ODBC DSN to talk to whichever database the customer has, and the application itself doesn't have to be changed.
A search on "Entity Framework Core ODBC" led me to the EF Core Github, where people have asked similar questions, and the answers were mostly along the lines of "why on earth would you want to do that?". Well, I need to do that.
Can I use EF Core with ODBC, or is there some other way that I can set up an Entity Framework Core application that does not have to be modified if the underlying database changes from PostgreSQL to SQL Server?
You could use your appsettings.json to store a value used to swap between the two. Those environment configs get reloaded on change (though you might have to restart your application to read them again, I'm not sure on that one).
Regardless something along the lines of this would suit your needs I think.
if (Configuration.GetSection("dbOptions")["postgres"]))
services.AddDbContext<ApplicationDbContext>(options => options.UseNpgsql(Configuration.GetConnectionString("PostgresConnectionString")));
else
services.AddDbContext<ApplicationDbContext>(options => options.UseSqlServer(Configuration.GetConnectionString("SqlServerConnectionString")));
EDIT: I placed this in Startup.cs where you would normally configure the DBContext. I use a similar solution reading off the Environment type to load either the Prod or QA connection strings based on deployment. In principle, this should accomplish the same task without the need for rebuilding and redeploying the code base.
I got an existing database with many tables which are accessed using stored procedures only (no O/RM). I'd like to create new tables in this database using Entity Framework and the Code First approach.
Do all the tables in my existing database need to be modelized in my Entity Framework classes? Will I be able to hand-code only the new classes I need in my DbContext? Other tables really need to stay untouched and away from O/RM for the moment.
Note: I'm going to be using the latest EF5.
As for now the Power Tools only allow you to reverse engineer all tables and views in the DB, which can be a problem if you have a big DB, with hundreds of objects, you do not want to reverse engineer.
However, I found an easy workaround for that:
Create a new technical user for the reverse engineering. To this user you only grant permission to the tables and views, that you want to be reverse engineered.
Have fun!
You are under no obligation to map any given table with EF. If you already have a database, you may want to consider reverse-engineering your database with the EF Power Tools available from Microsoft. I did this recently with a MySQL database that I had for testing purposes and it worked quite well!
If you are new to EF an advantage is that the PowerTools write a ton of code for you, which will help you get a grasp on the syntax of Code First. You will need to modify the output but it is a great start. I really believe that this approach will give you the least headache.
The EF PowerTools can be found here: http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/72a60b14-1581-4b9b-89f2-846072eff19d/
I like working with the entity framework for many reasons- the ease of use of the entity designer, the power of linq, and the ease of binding.
Occasionally I want to build a simple app that doesnt need to use a database, but still needs to work with data and display it on screen, in grids etc, so I'd like to just create a quick EF model and use it for this, but it doesnt seem to work very will with just using it for local data.
My question is- is there a correct usage of the EF for working with local data, and perhaps then just serialize/deserialize the whole context to a file? Or is this just too much effort to make work properyly? I used to use Datasets in this way, along with Linq to Dataset, and it works well... So perhaps those are still the better way to go for this scenario?
Yes you can use entity framework as local, and also access the data that is currently in-memory, read details as link below:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/data/jj592872.aspx
I don't know what you mean by "local data" exactly (sounds like it's not a database), but I think the Datasets vs. EF portion of your post is (for me) the real question.
EF is great when you need to model robust business logic, are implementing a Domain Model pattern, using Domain Driven Design, etc: basically any scenario where a Table Module or Active Record pattern is inappropriate.
When you just need to display some grids of data, and the business logic is very simple, Datasets are definitely the way to go (in my experience).
I have a system where there are two identical databases. One is for back of house work where data is imported, edited generally worked on. Once the data in the first database is as required it is coped to the second database, which is used to drive a public facing (read only) site.
So once a month, or so I will need to push data from database to another. I'd like to drive all this with EF, is that reasonable, can EF do this kind of thing, or will I get stuck part way down the line?
It's probably doable, but frankly, EF (or any other ORM) is not really suited for this kind of task. If you do decide to implement your synchronization tool with EF, at least make sure to turn off change tracking.
I wouldn't dismiss Yuri's suggestion (simply using a scheduled backup/restore), if the databases are really identical. It's certainly the easiest to implement!
Another solution would be to use a database synchronization tool, like Sql Server Integration Services.
I have to write a solution that uses different databases with different structure from the same code. So, when a user logs to the application I determine to which database he/she is connected to at runtime. The user can create tables and columns at any time and they have to see the change on the fly. The reason that I use one and the same code the information is manipulates the same way for the different databases. How can I accomplish this at runtime? Actually is the Entity Framework a good solution for my problem?
Thanks in advance.
You can do this with EF 4 using a code-first model. That said, I tend to avoid changing DB metadata on the fly, with or without EF. Rather, I'd choose a schema which fits the user's changing needs.