I am utilizing the Entity Framework in order to interface with some WCF services and some MVC3 websites I have built. I am using a database first approach.
What I have created is a library that has a Data, Model, and CRUD folder. Data contains the edmx file and a partial class for my Entities that creates a ToDTO() method. The Model contains a class of each of my entities that I can pass around as an object. The CRUD contains what should be expected - common read, update and delete methods.
My entities are named in the fashion of 'StudentEntity', and my DTO have a simpler name such as 'Student'. So the StudentEntity class has a method ToDTO which returns a Student object.
And my CRUD folder has a class with name Student that contains the CRUD operations for the student entities.
The confusion seems to come when I have another deleloper look over the code, they get confused on which Student they are looking at, the entity, the DTO, or the CRUD class.
How should I change my naming scheme to make it more understandable? Also can you give me any suggestions on cleaning it up a bit. Maybe I do not need the DTO classes and can somehow use extension/reflection to not have a separate class for each ToDTO method.
If I had to keep that same architecture, I would use the following naming conventions:
// Namespaces & folders
// /DTO (Data Transfer Objects classes only)
// /Model (edmx files and utility classes)
// /Data (Repositories)
// /Services (Specialized repositories and business logic classes)
// Naming conventions
StudentDTO // (Data Transfer Object)
Student // (the entity itself)
StudentRepository // (very common and conventional name)
StudentService // (common and conventional name)
My 2 cents,
Sincerely,
Max
Related
I've been scouring the net, but haven't found anything useful. I have a POCO class that I want to wire up to a stored procedure in Entity Framework 6.x. I've see how to do it in the Fluent API for Inserts, Updates, and Deletes.... but not for just straight Reading.
I found this: EF 6 Code First Stored Procedure - Read Only, but it looks like it's just a method on some controller somewhere.
Is there a way where I can call the context like I would any other Entity. I.E.,
ctx.Products.Where( p => p.ProductId == productId )?
I would approach this is one of two ways.
Domain / POCO mapping
If the underlying issue is a mismatch between your Entity Framework model POCO's and your (presumably purely logical) domain, I would match the EF model directly to the database schema and them map them across to domain types accordingly. I.e have a separate domain model to your EF poco's. The mapping work previously done by your proc would then be done within the domain mapper.
Abstract DbContext usage behind Repositories
Rather than having consumers directly query the context, you could abstract the context behind entity repositories and map between a SqlQuery calling a proc and your POCO's in the repository methods
E.g. here is some rough code:
public class MyEntityRepository()
{
public ICollection<MyEntity> GetAll()
{
return _myContext.SqlQuery<MyEntity>("exec myProc", params);
}
}
Neither of these options would be quick to implement and introduce into your codebase though.
I've tried to use Entity Framework 4 and POCO for my MVC 3 project. May be, I don't understand the main idea of this ORM, but the problem is following:
I added ADO .NET Entity Data Model and make model according to database.
I clicked Add Code Generation Item and added ADO .NET POCO Entity Generator.
It makes classes for every database table.
I want to add some methods to work with data (Add, Update, Delete, GetAll etc) to appropriate models.
For LINQTOSQL I added partial classes and placed them to Models. But now I can't do it because:
a) Models folder has classes with the same names, which was created by POCO.
b) If I place my partial class in the another folder, it will be another namespace - so, such classes won't be partial one.
c) If I place my code in POCO classes, it can be destroyed during update POCO.
How can I use it? Where sould I place my methods for data working?
Is the best way to make for POCO and EF the other project - http://blogs.msdn.com/b/adonet/archive/2010/01/25/walkthrough-poco-template-for-the-entity-framework.aspx?
First of all you don't have to write your CRUD inside POCO,
There are many places where you can do it like in edmx.cs file or write one more layer which is called as CRUD Services which handles the Database operations using context object.
Now coming to your questions,
Create separate Models folder and place the Model classes in there.
Your Model class may like this,
EmployeeDepartmentModel
{
prop EmpList List(Emp);
prop DeptList List(Dept);
//Emp and Dept are my POCOs
}
So now I have to fill both of these list(Your CRUD question),
For that, I will Create one method in Controller class(its better to write such logic in some another library, but for time being I suggest you to create in Controller),
FillTheModel()
{
EmployeeDepartmentModel.EmpList = EDMX.GetAllEmployees;
EmployeeDepartmentModel.DeptList = EDMX.GetAllDepartments;
}
Now you can bind this model with your view.
You can place the partial classes in another folder and modify the namespace.
I agree with allisewell, but if you really want to add parts to partial classes, give files another name,
e.g. MyPoco.Part2.cs or modify t4 template to name generated files
e.g. Poco.Generated.cs
I use standard ObjectContext and EntityObjects in my application. Let's say two of my tables are Projects & Services. Projects have Subproject (from Projects table with ParentID == ProjectID) and also Services. So I would have a hierarchy like Projects->Subprojects->Services. But I need to inherit Projects and Services from an abstract base class so I can use any of these entities as a new Task/Job entity in my application. Then, for example I can create a TreeList listing all Tasks (either a Project or Service). Is there anyway in EDMX designer I can create a new type (entity) which is the base calss for two or more concrete types?
It is possible with TPC inheritance but it will include a lot of complication to your design. For example:
you will have to move shared properties to the base class
you will probably have to maintain some mappings manually in EDMX (at least I had when I did the sample on screenshot)
you will have only single ObjectSet<Tasks> and you will have to use OfType to query only Projects or Services
you will have to use unique Id per Task = across both Project and Service tables (can be achieved by correctly configured identities in database)
It will look like:
Another option is using interface on your entity objects instead of parent class. You can define interface in your partial part of entity object and handle retrieving both Projects and Services by yourselves where your UI will expect only list of types implementing your interface.
http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/gilf/archive/2010/01/25/table-per-concrete-type-inheritance-in-entity-framework.aspx
Since it sounds like your data is coming from 2 separate tables, Projects and Services, no, I don't think you can achieve this in the designer (at least, not without hand-editing the generated edmx). If there were a common table to represent the base class, that could be done in the designer, but that doesn't sound like it fits your situation.
What you may be able to do is use an interface instead of an abstract base class, and use partial classes in your entity model to implement the interface for each of your entities. You can't directly inherit from your abstract base class in your entity model, because all of your entities already derive from EntityObject. If you have a lot of shared implementation that resides in your base class, it might be worthwhile to switch to POCO, where you can define your own inheritance hierarchy.
I am new to Entity Framework 4, and I am wondering, what's the best way to organize my data layer--the code that accesses EF4?
At this point, my data layer is set up like this:
DataStore class: Holds a reference to the EF4 ObjectContext, and contains methods to open, close, and persist the ObjectContext to storage.
Repository classes: One class for each entity, with methods to create, fetch, and delete entity objects.
Is there a better way to organize this functionality for EF4? I've looked for articles/blogs on the subject, but I'm not finding much. Any suggestions?
I use a generic repository for Entity Framework that makes access very easy. No need to write a separate repository for each entity, just:
MyDataContext ctx = new MyDataContext();
Repository<MyEntity, MyDataContext > myEntityRep = new Repository<MyEntity, MyDataContext>(ctx);
myEntityRep.Add(new MyEntity() {//property settings});
This repository totally abstracts the Entity model, allowing for creating, modifying, and deleting entities.
I prefer the repository classes for each entity type (I know them as DataMapper). One class for all queries easily becomes too monolithic hard to maintain.
I am considering to use DTOs instead of passing around my domain objects. I have read several posts here as well as elsewhere, and i understand there are several approaches to getting this done.
If i only have about 10 domain classes in all, and considering that i want to use DTOs rather than domain objects for consumption in my Views (WPF front ends), what is the recommended approach.
I think using tools like automapper etc maybe an overkill for my situation. So i am thinking of writing my custom mapper class that will have methods for converting a domain type to a DTO type.
What is the best way to do this, are there any sample to get me started to do this?
Second question: When writing those methods that will create DTOs, how do i deal with setting up all the data, especially when the domain type has references to other domain objects? Do i write equivalent properties in the DTO for mapping to those refernece types in the domain class?
Please ask if i have not put my second question in proper words. But i think you understand what i am trying to ask.
Thrid question: When writing DTOs, should i write multiple DTOs, each containing partial data for a given domain model, so that each of it can be used to cater to a specific View's requirement, or should the DTO have all the data that are there in the corresponding model class.
I've been reading a few posts here regarding DTO's and it seems to me that a lot of people equate them to what I would consider a ViewModel. A DTO is just that, Data Transfer Object - it's what gets passed down the wire. So I've got a website and services, only the services will have access to real domain/entity objects, and return DTO's. These may map 1:1, but consider that the DTO's may be populated from another service call, a database query, reading a config - whatever.
After that, the website then can take those DTO and either add them to a ViewModel, or convert into one. That ViewModel may contain many different types of DTO's. A simple example would be a task manager - the ViewModel contains both the task object you are editing, as well as a group of Dto.User objects that the task can be assigned to.
Keep in mind that the services returning DTO's maybe used by both a website, and maybe a tablet or phone application. These applications would have different views to take advantage of their displays and so the ViewModels would differ, but the DTO's would remain the same.
At any rate, I love these types of discussions, so anyone please let me know what you think.
Matt
I'm kind of using DTOs in a project. I tend to make the DTOs only to show the data I need for an specified view. I fetch all the data shown in the view in my data access class. For example, I may have an Order object which references a Client object:
public class Client{
public int Id{get;set;}
public string Name{get;set;}
}
public class Order{
public int OrderID{get;set;}
public Client client{get;set;}
public double Total{get;set;}
public IEnumerable<OrderLine> lines {get;set;}
}
Then in my OrderListDTO I may have something like:
public class OrderListDTO{
public int OrderId{get;set;}
public string ClientName{get;set;}
...
}
Which are the fields I want to show in my view. I fetch all these fields in my Database access code so I don't have to bother with entity asociations in my view or controller code.
Best Way to develop DTOs
The way to start developing DTOs is to understand that their sole purpose is to transfer subset of data of your business entities to different clients(could be UI, or an external service). Given this understanding you could create seperate packages for each client...and write your DTO classes. For mapping you could write your own mapper defining interfaces to be passed to a factory creating DTO objects based on which data from the entity for which the DTO is being created would be extracted. You could also define annotations to be placed on your entity fields but personally given the number of annotations used I would prefer the interface way. The main thing to note about DTOs is that they are also classes and data among the DTOs should be reused, in other words while it may seem tempting to create DTOs for each use case try to reuse existing DTOs to minimize this.
Getting started
Regarding getting started as stated above the sole purpose of the DTO is to give the client the data it needs....so you keeping in mind you could just set data into the dto using setters...or define a factory which creates a DTO from an Entity based on an interface.....
Regarding your third question, do as is required by your client :)
I come to project with spring-jdbc and there are used DAO layer. Some times existing entities doesn't cover all possible data from DB. So I start using DTO.
By applying '70 structure programming rule I put all DTOs into separate package:
package com.evil.dao; // DAO interfaces for IOC.
package com.evil.dao.impl; // DAO implementation classes.
package com.evil.dao.dto; // DTOs
Now I rethink and decide to put all DTO as inner classes on DAO interfaces for result-sets which have no reuse. So DAO interface look like:
interface StatisticDao {
class StatisticDto {
int count;
double amount;
String type;
public static void extract(ResultSet rs, StatisticDto dto) { ... }
}
List<StatisticDto> getStatistic(Criteria criteria);
}
class StatisticDaoImpl implements StatisticDao {
List<StatisticDto> getStatistic(Criteria criteria) {
...
RowCallbackHandler callback = new RowCallbackHandler() {
#Override
public void processRow(ResultSet rs) throws SQLException {
StatisticDao.StatisticDto.extract(rs, dto);
// make action on dto
}
}
namedTemplate.query(query, queryParams, callback);
}
}
I think that holding related data together (custom DTO with DAO interface) make code better for PageUp/PageDown.
Question 1: If the DTO's you need to transfer are just a simple subset of your domain object, you can use a modelmapper to avoid filling your codebase with logic-less mapping. But if you need to apply some logic/conversion to your mapping then do it yourself.
Question 2: You can and probably should create a DTO for each domain object you have on your main DTO. A DTO can have multiple DTO's inside of it, one for each domain object you need to map. And to map those you could do it yourself or even use some modelmapper.
Question 3: Don't expose all your domain if your view does not require it to. Also you don't need to create a DTO for each view, try to create DTO's that expose what need to be exposed and may be reused to avoid having multiples DTO's that share a lot of information. But it mainly depend's on your application needs.
If you need clarification, just ask.
I'm going to assume that your domain model objects have a primary key ID that may correspond to the ID's from the database or store they came from.
If the above is true, then your DTO will overcome type referecning to other DTO's like your domain objects do, in the form of a foreign key ID. So an OrderLine.OrderHeader relationship on the domain object, will be OrderLine.OrderHeaderId cin the DTO.
Hope that helps.
Can I ask why you have chosen to use DTO's instead of your rich domain objects in the view?
We all know what Dtos are (probably).
But the important thing is to overuse DTOs or not.
Transfering data using Dtos between "local" services is a good practice but have a huge overhead on your developer team.
There is some facts:
Clients should not see or interact with Entities (Daos). So you
always need Dtos for transferig data to/from remote (out of the process).
Using Dtos to pass data between services is optional. If you don't plan to split up your project to microservices there is no need to do that. It will be just an overhead for you.
And this is my comment: If you plan to distribute your project to
microservices in long future. or don't plan to do that, then
DON'T OVERUSE DTOs
You need to read this article https://martinfowler.com/bliki/LocalDTO.html