2 entities: Member and Comment
Member has an ICollection<Comment> Comments
Whenever I use member.Comments.Take(x) EF produces a query that gets all the comments from database.
Is it supposed to be like that?
Is it because property is ICollection?
Is there a way to tell EF to factor in my Take(x) or should i refactor my code to use context.Comments.Where(c=>c.MemberId==member.Id).Take(x) and live with it?
As described by #J. Tihon it is how EF works. When accessing lazy loaded property EF will always load the whole collection and any Linq expression is evaluated on the loaded collection. If you want to avoid that you must use the query as you described but the result of the query will not be loaded into your navigation property. To solve this you can use explicit loading instead of lazy loading:
context.Entry(member)
.Collection(m => m.Comments)
.Query()
.OrderBy(...) // Take requires some sorting
.Take(2)
.Load();
This should fill your Comments property with two comments.
The proxy classes generated by EF only provide lazy-loading for navigation properties, but they do not evaluate queries. Once you accessed the member.Comments property, the Comment-entities are loaded from the database and your query is applied in memory. To avoid this, you must get your comments in a query that is directly executed on the object-set (like the example you've already gave).
I believe this is by design, since you would have to return an IQueryable from the navigation property in order for the EF to intercept access to this property, but I suppose this isn't covered aswell.
You've already described a way to handle this, although it isn't pretty. Another option would be to somehow tell EF to partially load the property when you make the original query for the Member-object. I will look into that, but I can already think of one or two thinks that might go wrong with that approach.
Edit
After some research and trial and error I couldn't come up with another approach, that could be executed directly on the DbSet<Member> rather than DbSet<Comment> and returns a Member object. I is possible using an anonymous object:
var query = from m in catalog.Members
select new
{
Id = m.Id,
Name = m.Name,
Comments = m.Comments.Take(1)
};
Which could then be translated into a Member-object in memory, but of course it wouldn't be connected to the context in anyway (=no change tracking). In the sample query above I cannot create an instance of Member instead of an anonymous type, because EF can only create non-complex types (I'm guessing because the context knows that "Member" is an entity).
Related
I need to copy data from one database to another with EF. E.g. I have the following table relations: Forms->FormVersions->FormLayouts... We have different forms in both databases and we want to collect them to one DB. Basically I want to load Form object recursively from one DB and save it to another DB with all his references. Also I need to change IDs of the object and related objects if there are exists objects with the same ID in the second database.
Until now I have following code:
Form form = null;
using (var context = new FormEntities())
{
form = (from f in context.Forms
join fv in context.FormVersions on f.ID equals fv.FormID
where f.ID == 56
select f).First();
}
var context1 = new FormEntities("name=FormEntities1");
context1.AddObject("Forms", form);
context1.SaveChanges();
I'm receiving the error: "The EntityKey property can only be set when the current value of the property is null."
Can you help with implementation?
The simplest solution would be create copy of your Form (new object) and add that new object. Otherwise you can try:
Call context.Detach(form)
Set form's EntityKey to null
Call context1.AddObject(form)
I would first second E.J.'s answer. Assuming though that you are going to use Entity Framework, one of the main problem areas that you will face is relationship management. Your code should use the Include method to ensure that related objects are included in the results of a select operation. The join that you have will not have this effect.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb738708.aspx
Further, detaching an object will not automatically detach the related objects. You can detach them in the same way however the problem here is that as each object is detached, the relationships that it held to other objects within the context are broken.
Manually restoring the relationships may be an option for you however it may be worthwhile looking at EntityGraph. This framework allows you to define object graphs and then perform operations such as detach upon them. The entire graph is detached in a single operation with its relationships intact.
My experience with this framework has been in relation to RIA Services and Silverlight however I believe that these operations are also supported in .Net.
http://riaservicescontrib.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=EntityGraphs
Edit1: I just checked the EntityGraph docs and see that DetachEntityGraph is in the RIA specific layer which unfortunately rules it out as an option for you.
Edit2: Alex Jame's answer to the following question is a solution to your problem. Don't load the objects into the context to begin with - use the notracking option. That way you don't need to detach them which is what causes the problem.
Entity Framework - Detach and keep related object graph
If you are only doing a few records, Ladislav's suggestion will probably work, but if you are moving lots of data, you should/could consider doing this move in a stored procedure. The entire operation can be done at the server, with no need to move objects from the db server, to your front end and then back again. A single SP call would do it all.
The performance will be a lot better which may or may not not matter in your case.
I've been using Entity Framework Profiler to test my data access in an MVC project and have come accross several pages where I'm making far more db queries than I need to because of N+1 problems.
Here is a simple example to show my problem:
var club = this.ActiveClub; // ActiveClub uses code similar to context.Clubs.First()
var members = club.Members.ToList();
return View("MembersWithAddress", members);
The view loops through Members and then follows a navigion property on each member to also show their address. Each of the address requests results in an extra db query.
One way to solve this would be to use Include to make sure the extra tables I need are queried up front. However, I only seem to be able to do this on the ObjectSet of Clubs attached directly to the context. In this case the ActiveClub property is shared by lots of controllers and I don't always want to query the Member and address table up front.
I'd like to be able to use something like:
var members = club.Members.Include("Address").ToList();
But, Members is an EntityCollection and that doesn't have the Include method on it.
Is there a way to force a load on the Members EntityCollection and ask EF to also load their Addresses?
Or, is using EntityCollection navigation properties on an entity in this way, just a really bad idea; and you should know what you're loading when you get it from the context?
If your entities inherits from EntityObject try to use this:
var members = club.Members.CreateSourceQuery()
.Include("Address")
.ToList();
If you use POCOs with lazy loading proxies try to use this:
var members = ((EntityCollection<Club>)club.Members).CreateSourceQuery()
.Include("Address")
.ToList();
Obviously second version is not very nice because POCOs are used to remove dependency on EF but now you need to convert the collection to EF class. Another problem is that the query will be executed twice. Lazy loading will trigger for Members once to access the property and then second query will be executed when you call ToList. This can be solved by turning off lazy loading prior to running the query.
When you say ActiveClub is shared I believe it means something like it is property in base controller used in derived controllers. In such case you can still use different code in different controller to fill the property.
Is it possible to load an entity excluding some properties? One of this entity's properties is expensive to select. I would like to lazy load this property. Is that possible?
Now that you have read everyone's reply, I will give you the correct answer. EF does not support lazy loading of properties. However it does support a much powerful concept then this. It's called table splitting where you can map a table to two entities. Say a product table in the the database can be mapped to product entity and ProductDetail entity. You can then move the expensive fields to the ProductDetail entity and then create a 1..1 association between prodcut and productdetail entity. You can then lazy load the productdetail association only when you need it.
In my performance chapter of my book, I have a recipe called.
13-9. Moving an Expensive Property to Another Entity
Hope that helps!
Julie Lerman has an article on how to split a table
With a scalar property, the only way to selectively not load a certain property is to project in ESQL or L2E:
var q = from p in Context.People
select new
{
Id = p.Id,
Name = p.Name // note no Biography
};
+1 to Dan; doing this lazily is worse than loading it up-front. If you want to control loading, be explicit.
stimms is correct, but be careful while using lazy loading. You may have performance issues and not realize the property is getting loaded at a specific location in your code. This is because it loads the data when you use the property
I prefer to use explicit loading. This way you know when they get loaded and where. Here's a link that gives an example for the LoadProperty http://sankarsan.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/ado-net-entity-framework-data-loading-part-2/
You can also you Eager Loading by using the Include method. Example here:http://wildermuth.com/2008/12/28/Caution_when_Eager_Loading_in_the_Entity_Framework
Given a query over an EntityFramework DbSet, where the targeted entity contains a BigProperty and a SmallProperty,
When you're trying to only access the SmallProperty without loading the BigProperty in memory :
//this query loads the entire entity returned by FirstOrDefault() in memory
//the execution is deferred during Where; the execution happens at FirstOrDefault
db.BigEntities.Where(filter).FirstOrDefault()?.SmallProperty;
//this query only loads the SmallProperty in memory
//the execution is still deferred during Select; the execution happens at FirstOrDefault
//a subset of properties can be selected from the entity, and only those will be loaded in memory
db.BigEntities.Where(filter).Select(e=>e.SmallProperty).FirstOrDefault();
Therefore you could exploit this behaviour to only query the BigProperty where you actually need it, and use select statements to explicitly filter it out everywhere else.
I tested this with the Memory Usage functionality from the Visual Studio debug Diagnostic Tools.
Is it possible to get a collection (Dictionary) out of an Entity Object? I need this in order to pass parts of the Properties of the object to a function that needs an IDictionary.
Use:
Context.EntitySetName.AsEnumerable().ToDictionary(o => o.Key, o => o.Value);
Some detail on this:
ToDictionary is not supported in LINQ to Entities. This means that LINQ query string containing ToDictionary will compile, but will not execute, because the Entity Framework does not know how to translate them into SQL. Therefore, you have to execute the query on the database server first. So you have to project your set into a list first, which enumerates the entity set. AsEnumerable will do that. Obviously, if the entity set is large, you probably don't want to do this with the whole thing. Use a Where call or a LINQ query to reduce the result set to only the items you want in the dictionary first.
I don't think I fully understand your question. I don't know of any way of binding your database tables to IDictionary properties if that is what you are referring to, but you should be able to create whatever properties or methods you need to build a dictionary, and pass that. Is writing a business object method not an option for some reason?
For part of the project I'm currently working on, I have a set of four tables for syndicatable actions. One table is the abstract base for the other three, and each table is represented in my EF model like so:
EF Model -- Actions http://chris.charabaruk.com/system/files/images/EF+Model+Actions.png
There are two problems that I'm currently facing with this, however. The first problem is that Actor (a reference to a User) and Subject (a reference to an entity of the class associated with each type of action) are null in my subclasses, despite the associated database columns holding valid keys to rows in their associated tables. While I can get the keys via ActorReference and SubjectReference this of course requires setting up a new EF context and querying it for the referenced objects (as FooReference.Value is also null).
The second problem is that the reciprocal end of the relationship between the concrete action classes and their related entity classes always turn up nothing. For example, Task.RelatedActions, which should give me all TaskAction objects where Subject refers to the particular task object on which RelatedActions is called, is entirely devoid of objects. Again, valid rows exist in the database, Entity Framework just isn't putting them in objects and handing them to me.
Anyone know what it is I'm doing wrong, and what I should do to make it work?
Update: Seems that none of the relationship properties are working in my entity model any more, at all. WTF...
I think the issue you are experiencing here is that by default the EF does not automatically load related entities. If you load an entity, the collection or reference to related entities will be empty unless you do one of the following things:
1) Use eager loading in order to retrieve your main entity and your related entity in a single query. To do this, modify your query by adding a call to the Include method. In your sample above, you might use the following query:
from a in context.Actions.Include("Actor") select a
This would retrieve each of the actions with the related Actor method.
2) Use explicit lazy loading to retrieve the related entity when you need it:
action1.ActorReference.Load()
In the version of the EF which will ship with .Net 4.0, you will also have the following additional option:
3) Turn on implicit lazy loading so that related entities will automatically be retrieved when you reference the navigation property.
Danny