In the context of Entity Framework 4, the default behavior when adding a function import is to call it via ExecuteFunction<T>(), where T must apparently implement some property change notification stuff. (In my case it's generating a complex type derived from ComplexObject.)
I don't need or want any change notifications, and I'm required to send POCOs up the line after these sproc calls.
Is there a way to get a POCO directly from an EF sproc call? If not, does anyone have any recommendations on turning my sproc result into a POCO?
(I've played briefly with the POCO Template, but it doesn't seem to support stored procedures in any way.)
ExecuteFunction<T> returns an ObjectResult<T>, which implements IEnumerable<T>, so you can project the T onto anything via LINQ. E.g.:
IEnumerable<MyPoco> = from f in Context.MyFunction()
select new MyPoco
{
A = f.A,
B = f.B
};
Related
Entity Framework Layer Guidance
I'm in the design stage of a WPF business application. The first stage of this application will be a WPF/Desktop application. Later iterations may include a browser based mini version.
I envision creating a dll or 2 that contain the domain model & dbcontext that all applications(Desktop or Browser) will use.
My intention is to ride or die with EF. I'm not worried about using DI/Repository patterns etc for flexibility. The benefits of using them don't outweigh the added complexity in my opinion for this project. My plan is to use a model, and a derived dbcontext.
Having said that, I'm looking for input on where to put certain types of method code.
An example will hopefully make my question more clear:
Let's say I have the following two entities..
Entity: Employee
Entity: PermissionToken
Inside of these two entities I have a ManyToMany relationship resulting in me creating another entity for the relationship:
EmployeesPermissionTokens
For clarity, the PermissionToken Entity's Primary Key is an Enum representing the permission..
In the application, lets say the current user is Administering Employees and wants to grant a permission to an Employee.
In the app, I could certainly code this as:
var e = dbcontext.Employees.Find(1);
var pt = new PermissionToken
{
PermissionID=PermissionTypeEnum.DELETEUSER";
...
}
e.PermissionTokens.Add(pt)
But it seems to me that it would be more convenient to wrap that code in a method so that one line of code could perform those actions from whatever application chooses to do so. Where would a method like that live in all of this?
I've thought about adding a static method to the EF Entity:
In The employee class:
public static void GrantPermission(PermissionToken token)
{
e.PermissionTokens.Add(token);
}
Going further, what would be really convenient for the app would be the ability to write a line like this:
Permissions.GrantToEmployee(EmployeeID employeeId, PermissionTypeEnum
permissionId);
Of course that means that the method would have to be able to access the DbContext to grab the Employee Object and the PermissionObject by ID to do its work. I really want to avoid my entities knowing about/calling DbContext because I feel long term the entities get stuffed full of dbcontext code which in my opinion shouldn't even be in the Model classes.
So Where would a method like this go?
My gut tells me to put these sorts of code in my derived DbContext since in order to do these sorts of things, the method is going to need access to a DbContext anyway.
Does this make sense, or am I missing something? I hate to write oodles of code and then figure out 3 months later that I went down the wrong road to start with. Where should these types of methods live? I know there is probably a purist answer to this, but I'm looking for a clean, real world solution.
First of all you are making a good decision to not abstract EF behind a repository.
With the EF Context you have a class supporting the Unit Of Work pattern which is handling your data access needs.No need to wrap it up in repository.
However this does not mean you should call the Context directly from your controller or viewmodel.
You could indeed just extend the DbContext however I suggest to use services to mediate between your controllers/view models and your dbcontext.
If e.g. in your controller you are handling a user request (e.g. the user has clicked a button) then your controller should call a service to archive what ever "Use Case" is behind the button.
In your case this could be a PermissionService, the PermissionService would be the storage for all operations concerning permission.
public class PermissionService
{
PermissionService(DbContext context)
{
}
public bool AddPermission(Employee e, PermissionType type) { }
public bool RemovePermission(Employee e, PermissionType type) {}
}
Your service ofcourse needs access to the DbContext.
It makes sense to use DI here and register the DbContext with a DI Container.
Thus the context will be injected into all your services. This is pretty straight forward and I do not see any extra complexity here.
However, if you don't want to do this you can simply new up up the Db Context inside your services. Of course this is harder / impossible to mock for testing.
few days ago i read tutorial about GenericRepository and Unit Of Work patterns http://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/getting-started-with-ef-using-mvc/implementing-the-repository-and-unit-of-work-patterns-in-an-asp-net-mvc-application. I use web forms and i have EntityFramework CTP4 package installed. (I can't using EF 5).
I want to code generic repository for my project but i was stuck at this line:
this.dbSet = context.Set<TEntity>();
I know that this line doesn't work because a use ObjectContext in my project and database first approach. How can i deal with it? Can I code generic repository without migration to code first (which is not an option in my case) ?
This is the equivalent for ObjectContext:
this.dbSet = context.CreateObjectSet<TEntity>();
Now this creates an ObjectSet<TEntity> rather than a DbSet<TEntity>, but for your pattern you can use it in the same way.
UPDATE
The ObjectSet class does not have a utility method like that matches the Find() method of the DbSet. In order to "Get by key" you would need to construct an EntityKey and use the ObjectContext.GetEntityByKey(), unfortunately that's not a really simple thing to do.
There really isn't a simple way to tackle this, that I've found. In my case what I've done is to base all of my entities from a common class (using custom T4 templates to generate the classes from the model). And then I can add a generic constraint to my repositories, like:
public class MyRepository<TEntity> where TEntity : MyEntityBaseClass
And then my common base class has an Id field which is inherited by all the entities so I can can simply do:
return myObjectSet.SingleOrDefault(x => x.Id == myId);
I'm sure there are other approaches, that might be a good topic for another question.
1. You want to add the DbContextGenerator template to your visual studio templates:
2. After this make sure you clear out the default generation tool on your .edmx file.
3. Now you can implement the GenericRepository pattern as you wish.
For various reasons I would like to not store the connection string for my Entity Framework DB model in one of the various .config files. (I am using the latest and greatest DBContext API with the new Entity Framework version 4.1, .NET 4 and Visual Studio 2010 C#.) However, the code generation template for DBContext only creates a single parameterless constructor. (If I don't use the DBContext API, then my entity framework model has 7 different constructors to chose from, including the one I want.)
The only way I could figure out how to do this was to directly modify the code-generation template (context.tt file) to give me the constructor I want (example code below). This works, but it feels like I'm doing it "the hard way". What is the correct way to get a DBContext constructor that accepts a connection string?
public <#=Code.Escape(container)#>(string connectionString)
: base(connectionString)
{
<#
WriteLazyLoadingEnabled(container);
#>
}
One final note in case it might help somebody else. Although this method works, it took me a while to realize that the "connection string" is not strictly the DB connection string, but rather the special entity framework connection string which contains the DB connection string (just like what would be stored in the app.config file).
Your approach looks like the most correct way to do this. It's what the t4 templates were created for, and you're basically doing the same thing that the model-first templates do by default.
Another possibility would be to make the db context class be partial (if it isn't by default) and create another partial class file alongside it to add the constructor you want. But it seems likely that you'll want all of your t4-generated contexts to follow this pattern, so I think it's best to leverage the code generation to do this automatically the way you do in the question.
I've just implemented a repository based on EFv4 POCO entity templates.
When I do this
public Client Load(Guid firmId,
int prettyId)
{
var client = (from c in _ctx.Clients where c.firm_id == firmId && c.PrettyId == prettyId select c).FirstOrDefault();
return client;
}
the client returned is of type
{System.Data.Entity.DynamicProxies.Client_8E92CA62619EB03F03DF1A1FC60C5B21F87ECC5D85B65759DB3A3949B8A606D3}
What is happening here? I thought I would get rid of any reference to types from System.Data.Entity namespace. The returned instance should be of type Client, which is a simple POCO class.
I can confirm that the solution is to set
context.ProxyCreationEnabled = false;
which disables creation of dynamic proxy typed objects and leaves us with simple POCOs, which is what we were after with EF POCO templates in the first place.
But you lose lazy loading of navigation properties and change tracking on entities. For the first, you either have to use context.LoadProperty() or the Include() method on your ObjectQuery object. For the second, I do not know the solution yet (actually it doesn't really make sense to have change tracking on POCOs).
Also here is a similar question I would like to point out
What are the downsides to turning off ProxyCreationEnabled for CTP5 of EF code first
I agree that Mare's answer is correct. However, I would add a note of caution.
If you run a query without this ProxyCreationEnabled setting set to true, then EF will return DynamicProxies. If you subsequently run a query with the setting set to false, then EF will return the cached DynamicProxies objects, regardless of the ProxyCreationEnabled setting.
This can be configured globally for the EF context in the *Model.Context.tt file in *Model.edmx under
if (!loader.IsLazyLoadingEnabled(container))
...
this.Configuration.LazyLoadingEnabled = false;
this.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled = false;
These will be added to the *Model.context.cs generated file, and will persist between updates from the Database.
I prefer this setting as I do not want a child object that matches the parent loaded from the database.
ALT: It can be configured for Json serizialization:
JSON.NET Error Self referencing loop detected for type
Starting to play around with EF4 and I notice there are several different ways to query the DB.
Currently I created an .EDMX with my tables/objects created.
In code when I use the Where method, it wants me to pass in a string for the 1st param, ESQL I'm guessing. What I want to use is lambda expressions. All the tutorials show this, but isn't how I'm setup for some reason.
new Entities().Users.Where();
Ah, you must include the namespace System.Linq to get the extension methods.
Assuming your user entity has a property called LastName, you would write something like this to get all users with the
Entities().Users.Where(u => u.LastName == "Hansen");