This code will auto generate a new part number. This is a Post-processing BPM for BO GetNewPart
int iPartnum = 0;
string cPartid = string.Empty;
Erp.Tables.Company Company;
foreach (var ttpart_xRow in ttPart)
{
var ttpartRow = ttpart_xRow;
Company = (from Company_Row in Db.Company
where Company_Row.Company == Session.CompanyID
select Company_Row).FirstOrDefault();
iPartnum = (decimal)Company["AutoGenerate_c"] + 1;
cPartid = System.Convert.ToString(iPartnum);
ttpartRow.PartNum = cPartid;
Services.Lib.UpdateTableBuffer._UpdateTableBuffer(Company,"AutoGenerate_c", iPartnum);
}
Is it just not working or is there an error message?
Services.Lib.UpdateTableBuffer._UpdateTableBuffer(Company,"AutoGenerate_c", iPartnum);
I have personally never used or even seen this Lib item so I can't vouch for it. I would update the object manually inside of a transaction scope because I doubt GetNewPart ever touches that database and therefore probably doesn't create a transaction.
using (System.Transactions.TransactionScope txScope = IceDataContext.CreateDefaultTransactionScope())//start the transaction
{
//Your Logics go here
Db.Validate();
txScope.Complete();//commit the transaction
}
As a side note, I try to keep these sorts of things off of the company record because nearly every process in the system touches it and I don't want a process to lock it up or cause weird race conditions. I generally like to reserve a record that will only get touched for this specific purpose so I have a UDCodeType/UDCode for this sort of thing.
Related
I have a loop, abridged here, that performs an import of employee records, as follows:
var cts2005 = new Cts2005Entities();
IEmployeeRepository repository = new EmployeeRepository();
foreach (var c in cts2005.Candidates)
{
var e = new Employee();
e.RefNum = c.CA_EMP_ID;
e.TitleId = GetTitleId(c.TITLE);
e.Initials = c.CA_INITIALS;
e.Surname = c.CA_SURNAME;
repository.Insert(e);
}
There are actually several more fields, and a total of nine lookups like GetTitleId(c.TITLE)
above. Code for these is all exactly like this:
private List<Title> _titles;
private Guid GetTitleId(string titleName)
{
ITitleRepository repository = new TitleRepository();
if (_titles == null)
{
_titles = repository.ListAll().ToList();
}
var title = _titles.FirstOrDefault(t => String.Compare(t.Name, titleName, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase) == 0);
if (title == null)
{
title = new Title { Name = titleName };
repository.Insert(title);
_titles.Add(title);
}
return title.Id;
}
All repository.Insert() calls look like this, except the entity types differ:
public void Insert(Employee entity)
{
CurrentDbContext.Employees.Add(entity);
CurrentDbContext.SaveChanges();
}
And all PK's are Guid. I know this could be a small problem, but I didn't expect it to have such a large effect with small volumes like this.
I have done no tuning or optimization on this routine yet, as it was only for my small test db, but yesterday I was forced to do a surprise import of 6000 records. Toward the end, this processed had slowed to about 1 sec per record, which is quite dismal. I wouldn't have expected high speeds without some tuning, but nothing as low as that.
Is there anything obviously, grossly wrong with my method here?
Your GetTitleId is pulling all Titles from the database once down into the application, but it is doing a linear search over all of them for each "Candidate". That is likely to be very expensive. Use a client-side hashtable with a StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase.
Also, why don't you profile your application? Put load on it and hit break in the debugger 10 times. Where does it stop most of the time? This is the hot-spot.
Thanks to the comment from marc_s above, I changed the routine to only call SaveChanges every 500 inserts, and the speed improved with about 500%.
An old question for Linq 2 Entities. I'm just asking it again, in case someone has came up with the solution.
I want to perform query that does this:
UPDATE dbo.Products WHERE Category = 1 SET Category = 5
And I want to do it with Entity Framework 4.3.1.
This is just an example, I have a tons of records I just want 1 column to change value, nothing else. Loading to DbContext with Where(...).Select(...), changing all elements, and then saving with SaveChanges() does not work well for me.
Should I stick with ExecuteCommand and send direct query as it is written above (of course make it reusable) or is there another nice way to do it from Linq 2 Entities / Fluent.
Thanks!
What you are describing isnt actually possible with Entity Framework. You have a few options,
You can write it as a string and execute it via EF with .ExecuteSqlCommand (on the context)
You can use something like Entity Framework Extended (however from what ive seen this doesnt have great performance)
You can update an entity without first fetching it from db like below
using (var context = new DBContext())
{
context.YourEntitySet.Attach(yourExistingEntity);
// Update fields
context.SaveChanges();
}
If you have set-based operations, then SQL is better suited than EF.
So, yes - in this case you should stick with ExecuteCommand.
I don't know if this suits you but you can try creating a stored procedure that will perform the update and then add that procedure to your model as a function import. Then you can perform the update in a single database call:
using(var dc = new YourDataContext())
{
dc.UpdateProductsCategory(1, 5);
}
where UpdateProductsCategory would be the name of the imported stored procedure.
Yes, ExecuteCommand() is definitely the way to do it without fetching all the rows' data and letting ChangeTracker sort it out. Just to provide an example:
Will result in all rows being fetched and an update performed for each row changed:
using (YourDBContext yourDB = new YourDBContext()) {
yourDB.Products.Where(p => p.Category = 1).ToList().ForEach(p => p.Category = 5);
yourDB.SaveChanges();
}
Just a single update:
using (YourDBContext yourDB = new YourDBContext()) {
var sql = "UPDATE dbo.Products WHERE Category = #oldcategory SET Category = #newcategory";
var oldcp = new SqlParameter { ParameterName = "oldcategory", DbType = DbType.Int32, Value = 1 };
var newcp = new SqlParameter { ParameterName = "newcategory", DbType = DbType.Int32, Value = 5 };
yourDB.Database.ExecuteSqlCommand(sql, oldcp, newcp);
}
The main problem is that I recieve the following message:
"base {System.SystemException} = {"Unable to create a constant value of type 'BokButik1.Models.Book-Author'. Only primitive types ('such as Int32, String, and Guid') are supported in this context."}"
based on this LinQ code:
IBookRepository myIBookRepository = new BookRepository();
var allBooks = myIBookRepository.HamtaAllaBocker();
IBok_ForfattareRepository myIBok_ForfattareRepository = new Bok_ForfattareRepository();
var Book-Authors =
myIBok_ForfattareRepository.HamtaAllaBok_ForfattareNummer();
var q =
from booknn in allBooks
join Book-Authornn in Book-Authors on booknn.BookID equals
Book-Authornn.BookID
select new { booknn.title, Book-AuthorID };
How shall I solve this problem to get a class instance that contain with property title and Book-AuthorID?
// Fullmetalboy
I also have tried making some dummy by using "allbooks" relation with Code Samples from the address http://www.hookedonlinq.com/JoinOperator.ashx. Unfortunately, still same problem.
I also have taken account to Int32 due to entity framework http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb896317.aspx. Unfortunatley, still same problem.
Using database with 3 tables and one of them is a many to many relationship. This database is used in relation with entity framework
Book-Author
Book-Author (int)
BookID (int)
Forfattare (int)
Book
BookID (int)
title (string)
etc etc etc
It appears that you are using two separate linq-to-sql repositories to join against. This won't work. Joins can only work between tables defined in a single repository.
However, if you are happy to bring all of the data into memory then it is very easy to make your code work. Try this:
var myIBookRepository = new BookRepository();
var myIBok_ForfattareRepository = new Bok_ForfattareRepository();
var allBooks =
myIBookRepository.HamtaAllaBocker().ToArray();
var Book_Authors =
myIBok_ForfattareRepository.HamtaAllaBok_ForfattareNummer().ToArray();
var q =
from booknn in allBooks
join Book_Authornn in Book_Authors
on booknn.BookID equals Book_Authornn.BookID
select new { booknn.title, Book_AuthorID = Book_Authornn.Book_Author };
Note the inclusion of the two .ToArray() calls.
I had to fix some of you variable names and I made a bit of a guess on getting the Author ID.
Does this work for you?
I would suggest only having a single repository and allowing normal joining to occur - loading all objects into memory can be expensive.
If you are making custom repositories you make also consider making a custom method that returns the title and author IDs as a defined class rather than as anonymous classes. Makes for better testability.
My career started as a hard-core functional-paradigm developer (LISP), and now I'm a hard-core .net/C# developer. Of course I'm enamored with LINQ. However, I also believe in (1) using the right tool for the job and (2) preserving the KISS principle: of the 60+ engineers I work with, perhaps only 20% have hours of LINQ / functional paradigm experience, and 5% have 6 to 12 months of such experience. In short, I feel compelled to stay away from LINQ unless I'm hampered in achieving a goal without it (wherein replacing 3 lines of O-O code with one line of LINQ is not a "goal").
But now one of the engineers, having 12 months LINQ / functional-paradigm experience, is using LINQ to objects, or at least lambda expressions anyway, in every conceivable location in production code. My various appeals to the KISS principle have not yielded any results. Therefore...
What published studies can I next appeal to? What "coding standard" guideline have others concocted with some success? Are there published LINQ performance issues I could point out? In short, I'm trying to achieve my first goal - KISS - by indirect persuasion.
Of course this problem could be extended to countless other areas (such as overuse of extension methods). Perhaps there is an "uber" guide, highly regarded (e.g. published studies, etc), that takes a broader swing at this. Anything?
LATE EDIT: Wow! I got schooled! I agree I'm coming at this entirely wrong-headed. But as a clarification, please take a look below at sample code I'm actually seeing. Originally it compiled and worked, but its purpose is now irrelevant. Just go with the "feel" of it. Now that I'm revisiting this sample a half year later, I'm getting a very different picture of what is actually bothering me. But I'd like to have better eyes than mine make the comments.
//This looks like it was meant to become an extension method...
public class ExtensionOfThreadPool
{
public static bool QueueUserWorkItem(Action callback)
{
return ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem((o) => callback());
}
}
public class LoadBalancer
{
//other methods and state variables have been stripped...
void ThreadWorker()
{
// The following callbacks give us an easy way to control whether
// we add additional headers around outbound WCF calls.
Action<Action> WorkRunner = null;
// This callback adds headers to each WCF call it scopes
Action<Action> WorkRunnerAddHeaders = (Action action) =>
{
// Add the header to all outbound requests.
HttpRequestMessageProperty httpRequestMessage = new HttpRequestMessageProperty();
httpRequestMessage.Headers.Add("user-agent", "Endpoint Service");
// Open an operation scope - any WCF calls in this scope will add the
// headers above.
using (OperationContextScope scope = new OperationContextScope(_edsProxy.InnerChannel))
{
// Seed the agent id header
OperationContext.Current.OutgoingMessageProperties[HttpRequestMessageProperty.Name] = httpRequestMessage;
// Activate
action();
}
};
// This callback does not add any headers to each WCF call
Action<Action> WorkRunnerNoHeaders = (Action action) =>
{
action();
};
// Assign the work runner we want based on the userWCFHeaders
// flag.
WorkRunner = _userWCFHeaders ? WorkRunnerAddHeaders : WorkRunnerNoHeaders;
// This outter try/catch exists simply to dispose of the client connection
try
{
Action Exercise = () =>
{
// This worker thread polls a work list
Action Driver = null;
Driver = () =>
{
LoadRunnerModel currentModel = null;
try
{
// random starting value, it matters little
int minSleepPeriod = 10;
int sleepPeriod = minSleepPeriod;
// Loop infinitely or until stop signals
while (!_workerStopSig)
{
// Sleep the minimum period of time to service the next element
Thread.Sleep(sleepPeriod);
// Grab a safe copy of the element list
LoadRunnerModel[] elements = null;
_pointModelsLock.Read(() => elements = _endpoints);
DateTime now = DateTime.Now;
var pointsReadyToSend = elements.Where
(
point => point.InterlockedRead(() => point.Live && (point.GoLive <= now))
).ToArray();
// Get a list of all the points that are not ready to send
var pointsNotReadyToSend = elements.Except(pointsReadyToSend).ToArray();
// Walk each model - we touch each one inside a lock
// since there can be other threads operating on the model
// including timeouts and returning WCF calls.
pointsReadyToSend.ForEach
(
model =>
{
model.Write
(
() =>
{
// Keep a record of the current model in case
// it throws an exception while we're staging it
currentModel = model;
// Lower the live flag (if we crash calling
// BeginXXX the catch code will re-start us)
model.Live = false;
// Get the step for this model
ScenarioStep step = model.Scenario.Steps.Current;
// This helper enables the scenario watchdog if a
// scenario is just starting
Action StartScenario = () =>
{
if (step.IsFirstStep && !model.Scenario.EnableWatchdog)
{
model.ScenarioStarted = now;
model.Scenario.EnableWatchdog = true;
}
};
// make a connection (if needed)
if (step.UseHook && !model.HookAttached)
{
BeginReceiveEventWindow(model, step.HookMode == ScenarioStep.HookType.Polled);
step.RecordHistory("LoadRunner: Staged Harpoon");
StartScenario();
}
// Send/Receive (if needed)
if (step.ReadyToSend)
{
BeginSendLoop(model);
step.RecordHistory("LoadRunner: Staged SendLoop");
StartScenario();
}
}
);
}
, () => _workerStopSig
);
// Sleep until the next point goes active. Figure out
// the shortest sleep period we have - that's how long
// we'll sleep.
if (pointsNotReadyToSend.Count() > 0)
{
var smallest = pointsNotReadyToSend.Min(ping => ping.GoLive);
sleepPeriod = (smallest > now) ? (int)(smallest - now).TotalMilliseconds : minSleepPeriod;
sleepPeriod = sleepPeriod < 0 ? minSleepPeriod : sleepPeriod;
}
else
sleepPeriod = minSleepPeriod;
}
}
catch (Exception eWorker)
{
// Don't recover if we're shutting down anyway
if (_workerStopSig)
return;
Action RebootDriver = () =>
{
// Reset the point SendLoop that barfed
Stagepoint(true, currentModel);
// Re-boot this thread
ExtensionOfThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(Driver);
};
// This means SendLoop barfed
if (eWorker is BeginSendLoopException)
{
Interlocked.Increment(ref _beginHookErrors);
currentModel.Write(() => currentModel.HookAttached = false);
RebootDriver();
}
// This means BeginSendAndReceive barfed
else if (eWorker is BeginSendLoopException)
{
Interlocked.Increment(ref _beginSendLoopErrors);
RebootDriver();
}
// The only kind of exceptions we expect are the
// BeginXXX type. If we made it here something else bad
// happened so allow the worker to die completely.
else
throw;
}
};
// Start the driver thread. This thread will poll the point list
// and keep shoveling them out
ExtensionOfThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(Driver);
// Wait for the stop signal
_workerStop.WaitOne();
};
// Start
WorkRunner(Exercise);
}
catch(Exception ex){//not shown}
}
}
Well, it sounds to me like you're the one wanting to make the code more complicated - because you believe your colleagues aren't up to the genuinely simple approach. In many, many cases I find LINQ to Objects makes the code simpler - and yes that does include changing just a few lines to one:
int count = 0;
foreach (Foo f in GenerateFoos())
{
count++;
}
becoming
int count = GenerateFoos().Count();
for example.
Where it isn't making the code simpler, it's fine to try to steer him away from LINQ - but the above is an example where you certainly aren't significantly hampered by avoiding LINQ, but the "KISS" code is clearly the LINQ code.
It sounds like your company could benefit from training up its engineers to take advantage of LINQ to Objects, rather than trying to always appeal to the lowest common denominator.
You seem to be equating Linq to objects with greater complexity, because you assume that unnecessary use of it violates "keep it simple, stupid".
All my experience has been the opposite: it makes complex algorithms much simpler to write and read.
On the contrary, I now regard imperative, statement-based, state-mutational programming as the "risky" option to be used only when really necessary.
So I'd suggest that you put effort into getting more of your colleagues to understand the benefit. It's a false economy to try to limit your approaches to those that you (and others) already understand, because in this industry it pays huge dividends to stay in touch with "new" practises (of course, this stuff is hardly new, but as you point out, it's new to many from a Java or C# 1.x background).
As for trying to pin some charge of "performance issues" on it, I don't think you're going to have much luck. The overhead involved in Linq-to-objects itself is minuscule.
I have a strange problem when deleteting records using linq, my suspicion is that it has something to do with the range variable (named source). After deleting a record all targets for a customer are retrieved using the following statement:
var q = from source in unitOfWork.GetRepository<db_Target>().Find()
where source.db_TargetBase.db_Person.fk_Customer == customerID
select source.FromLinq();
where FromLinq is in extention method on db_target:
public static Target FromLinq(this db_Target source)
{
return new Target
{
id = source.id,
LastModified = source.db_TargetBase.LastModified,
...
}
}
When a record is deleted both db_Target and db_TargetBase are deleted. When, for example, two users are deleting records, linq tries to retrieve a record for user2 which is deleted by user1, causing a crash on the LastModified = source.db_TargetBase.LastModified line because db_TargetBase is null.
When using the following code the problem does not occure and only the non-deleted records are retrieved:
var q = from source in unitOfWork.GetRepository<db_Target>().Find()
where source.db_TargetBase.db_Person.fk_Customer == customerID
select new Target
{
id = source.id,
LastModified = source.db_TargetBase.LastModified,
...
};
This spawns two questions:
What is happening here? Am I making a copy of the range variable source because I'm using it in a extention method?
How can I "wrap" the return new Target code? I am using this in multiple places and do not want to copy it every time. Making my code harder to maintain.
TIA,
JJ
In the first set of code - since the initializer lives an a non-translatable method (extension or otherwise), it cannot be translated - so it is run locally.
In the second set of code - the initializer is represented by an elementinit expression, which is translated (examine/compare the select clause of the generated sql for proof).
if you want to wrap this, you need to have an Expression<Func<db_Target, Target>> that anyone can grab and use in thier query. Fortunately, that's easy to do:
public Expression<Func<db_Target, Target>> GetFromLinqExpressionForTarget()
{
return
source => new Target
{
id = source.id,
LastModified = source.db_TargetBase.LastModified,
...
}
}
Which may be used like so:
var FromLinq = GetFromLinqExpressionForTarget();
var q =
(
from source in ...
...
...
select source
).Select(FromLinq);
Now ... I'm really running on a guess here and am only about 60% confident that my answer is correct. So if someone wants to confirm this, that'll make my day. :)