My code is as below:
var conntionRecord1Id = (from connectionBase in orgServiceContext.CreateQuery("connection")
where connectionBase["record1roleid"] == null
select new { OpportunityId = connectionBase["record1id"] }).Distinct().ToList();
var query =
from opportunity in orgServiceContext.CreateQuery("opportunity")
orderby opportunity["createdon"] ascending
select new
{
Topic = opportunity.Attributes.Contains("name") == true ? opportunity["name"] : null,
OpportunityId = opportunity.Attributes.Contains("opportunityid") == true ? opportunity["opportunityid"] : null,
PostalCode = opportunity.Attributes.Contains("new_address_postalcode") == true ? opportunity["new_address_postalcode"] : null,
};
var result = (from f in query.ToList() where conntionRecord1Id.Contains(f.OpportunityId) select f).ToList();
But in above query where i am using Contains it giving count 0. even though I have common records in the list
The Contains Linq extension method does not know how to compare complex objects.
Comparing f.OpportunityId to a list of Guids instead of a list of an anonymous type will work:
var conntionRecord1Id = (from connectionBase in orgServiceContext
.CreateQuery("connection")
where connectionBase["record1roleid"] == null
select connectionBase.GetAttributeValue<Guid?>("record1id"))
.Distinct()
.ToList();
Implement IEqualityComparer in a custom comparer class to compare complex objects: https://stackoverflow.com/a/6694563/1817350
Keep in mind that calling .ToList() brings down all the records into memory and will cause performance problems with large amounts of records.
Related
How does one convert a query to a list?
I've tried several different ways to ToList this query, but I'm not able to be successful.
var parent =
from s in Students
where s.Id==5027
select new {
ID_PK = (s.CaseOwnerIdAspnet_Users.User_ID_FKDYN_User_Profile.Organization_ID_FKDYN_Organization.Parent_ID_FK == null ?
(int) s.CaseOwnerIdAspnet_Users.User_ID_FKDYN_User_Profile.Organization_ID_FKDYN_Organization.ID_PK
:
(int) s.CaseOwnerIdAspnet_Users.User_ID_FKDYN_User_Profile.Organization_ID_FKDYN_Organization.Parent_ID_FK)
};
try this...
var list =parent.ToList();
For the following query:
var result = from sch in schemeDashboard
join exp in Expenditure on sch.schemeId equals exp.SchemeCode
into SchExpGroup
where sch.SectorDepartmentId == selectedDepartmentId &&
sch.YearCode == StateManager.CurrentYear
orderby sch.ADPId
select new
{
ModifiedAmounts = SchExpGroup.Select(a => a.ModifiedAmounts),
ProjectName = sch.schemeName,
ADPNo = sch.ADPId,
Allocation = sch.CurrentAllocation,
Expenditures = from expend in SchExpGroup
where expend.YearCode == StateManager.CurrentYear &&
expend.DepartmentId == selectedDepartmentId &&
InvStatus.Contains(expend.Status)
orderby expend.ADPId
group expend by expend.InvoiceId
};
I want to filter the above query on a condition so that result gives only those records where "ModifiedAmounts" are not null. I have tried as follow:
if (rbList2.SelectedIndex == 6)
{
result = result.Where(a => a.ModifiedAmounts != null));
}
but this gives error as:
Cannot compare elements of type
'System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable`1'. Only primitive types,
enumeration types and entity types are supported.
Any suggestions as I am lost as how to rephrase the filtered query.
I think the problem is that ModifiedAmounts will never be null. Select will return an empty list. Unless SchExpGroup is null in which case you will get a null reference exception.
Try changing your code to
result = result.Where(a => a.ModifiedAmounts.Any());
if (rbList2.SelectedIndex == 6)
{
result = result.Where(a => a.!ModifiedAmounts.Any());
}
I have the following LINQ query using EF5 and generic repository, unit of work patterns to a SQL Server 2008 db
var countriesArr = GetIdsFromDelimStr(countries);
var competitionsArr = GetIdsFromDelimStr(competitions);
var filterTeamName = string.Empty;
if (teamName != null)
{
filterTeamName = teamName.ToUpper();
}
using (var unitOfWork = new FootballUnitOfWork(ConnFooty))
{
// give us our selection of teams
var teams =
(from team in
unitOfWork.TeamRepository.Find()
where ((string.IsNullOrEmpty(filterTeamName) || team.Name.ToUpper().Contains(filterTeamName)) &&
(countriesArr.Contains(team.Venue.Country.Id) || countriesArr.Count() == 0))
select new
{
tId = team.Id
}).Distinct();
// give us our selection of contests
var conts = (
from cont in
unitOfWork.ContestRepository.Find(
c =>
((c.ContestType == ContestType.League && competitionsArr.Count() == 0) ||
(competitionsArr.Contains(c.Competition.Id) && competitionsArr.Count() == 0)))
select new
{
contId = cont.Id
}
).Distinct();
// get selection of home teams based on contest
var homecomps = (from fixt in unitOfWork.FixtureDetailsRepository.Find()
where
teams.Any(t => t.tId == fixt.HomeTeam.Id) &&
conts.Any(c => c.contId == fixt.Contest.Id)
select new
{
teamId = fixt.HomeTeam.Id,
teamName = fixt.HomeTeam.Name,
countryId = fixt.HomeTeam.Venue.Country.Id != null ? fixt.HomeTeam.Venue.Country.Id : 0,
countryName = fixt.HomeTeam.Venue.Country.Id != null ? fixt.HomeTeam.Venue.Country.Name : string.Empty,
compId = fixt.Contest.Competition.Id,
compDesc = fixt.Contest.Competition.Description
}).Distinct();
// get selection of away teams based on contest
var awaycomps = (from fixt in unitOfWork.FixtureDetailsRepository.Find()
where
teams.Any(t => t.tId == fixt.AwayTeam.Id) &&
conts.Any(c => c.contId == fixt.Contest.Id)
select new
{
teamId = fixt.AwayTeam.Id,
teamName = fixt.AwayTeam.Name,
countryId = fixt.AwayTeam.Venue.Country.Id != null ? fixt.AwayTeam.Venue.Country.Id : 0,
countryName = fixt.AwayTeam.Venue.Country.Id != null ? fixt.AwayTeam.Venue.Country.Name : string.Empty,
compId = fixt.Contest.Competition.Id,
compDesc = fixt.Contest.Competition.Description
}).Distinct();
// ensure that we return the max competition based on id for home teams
var homemax = (from t in homecomps
group t by t.teamId
into grp
let maxcomp = grp.Max(g => g.compId)
from g in grp
where g.compId == maxcomp
select g).Distinct();
// ensure that we return the max competition based on id for away teams
var awaymax = (from t in awaycomps
group t by t.teamId
into grp
let maxcomp = grp.Max(g => g.compId)
from g in grp
where g.compId == maxcomp
select g).Distinct();
var filteredteams = homemax.Union(awaymax).OrderBy(t => t.teamName).AsQueryable();
As you can see we want to return the following format which is passed across to a WebAPI so we cast the results to types we can relate to in the UI.
Essentially what we are trying to do is get the home and away teams from a fixture, these fixtures have a contest which relates to a competition. We then get the highest competition id from the grouping and then this is returned with that team. The country is related to the team based on the venue id, when I was originally doing this i had problems figuring out how to do OR joins in linq which is why i split it down to getting home teams and away team and then grouping them based on competition then unioning them together.
An idea of current table size is fixtures has 7840 rows, teams has 8581 rows, contests has 337 rows and competitions has 96 rows. The table that is likely to increase rapidly is the fixture table as this is related to football.
The output we want to end up with is
Team Id, Team Name, Country Id, Country Name, Competition Id, Competition Name
Using no filtering this query takes on average around 5 secs, just wondering if anybody has any ideas/pointers on how to make it quicker.
thanks in advance Mark
I can't judge whether it will speed up things, but your homemax and awaymax queries could be
var homemax = from t in homecomps
group t by t.teamId into grp
select grp.OrderByDescending(x => x.compId).FirstOrDefault();
var awaymax = from t in awaycomps
group t by t.teamId into grp
select grp.OrderByDescending(x => x.compId).FirstOrDefault();
Further, as you are composing one very large query it may perform better when you cut it up in a few smaller queries that fetch intermediary results. Sometimes a few more roundtrips to the database perform better than one very large query for which the database engine can't find a good execution plan.
Another thing is all these Distinct()s. Do you always need them? I think you can do without because you are always fetching data from one table without joining a child collection. Removing them may save a bunch.
Yet another optimization could be to remove the ToUpper. The comparison is done by the database engine in SQL and chances are that the database has a case-insensitive collation. If so, the comparison is never case sensitive even if you'd want it to be! Constructs like Name.ToUpper cancel the use of any index on Name (it is not sargable).
First Table is the View and Second is the result I want
This below query works fine
List<BTWStudents> students = (from V in db.vwStudentCoursesSD
where classIds.Contains(V.Class.Value)
select new BTWStudents
{
StudentId = V.StudentId
Amount= V.PaymentMethod == "Cashier Check" ? V.Amount: "0.00"
}).Distinct().ToList();
But I changed it to List to add string formatting(see below)
List<BTWStudents> students = (from V in db.vwStudentCoursesSD
where classIds.Contains(V.Class.Value)
select new {V}).ToList().Select(x => new BTWStudents
{
StudentId = V.StudentId
Amount= V.PaymentMethod == "Cashier Check" ? String.Format("{0:c}",V.Amount): "0.00"
}).Distinct().ToList();
With this Second Query I get this
Why is distinct not working in the second query?
When working with objects (in your case a wrapped anonymous type because you are using Select new {V} rather than just Select V), Distinct calls the object.Equals when doing the comparison. Internally, this checks the object's hash code. You'll find in this case, the hash code of the two objects is different even though the fields contain the same values. To fix this, you will need to override Equals on the object type or pass a custom IEqualityComparer implementation into the Distinct overload. You should be able to find a number of examples online searching for "Distinct IEqualityComparer".
Try this (moved your distinct to the first query and corrected your bugged if/then/else):
List<BTWStudents> students = (from V in db.vwStudentCoursesSD
where classIds.Contains(V.Class.Value)
select new {V}).Distinct().ToList().Select(x => new BTWStudents
{
classId = V.Class.HasValue ? V.Class.Value : 0,
studentName = V.StudentName,
paymentAmount = V.PaymentMethod == "Cashier Check" ? String.Format("{0:c}",x.V.AmountOwed): "0.00"
}).ToList();
You can get around using Distinct all together if you Group by StudentID
var studentsGroupedByPayment =
(from V in db.vwStudentCoursesSD
where classIds.Contains(V.Class.Value)
group V by V.StudentId into groupedV
select new
{
StudentID = groupedV.Key,
Amount = string.Format("{0:C}",
groupedV.First().PaymentMethod == "Cashier Check" ?
groupedV.First().Amount : 0.0)
}
).ToList();
What do I put in my order by?? I want to order by Name. I have moved the orderby after the distinct because I read that it needs to be done last.
var result = (from r in db.RecordDocs
where r.RecordID == recordID
select new
{
DocTypeID = r.Document.DocType.DocTypeID,
Name = r.Document.DocType.Name,
Number = r.Document.DocType.Number
}
).Distinct().OrderBy( );
Just do
.OrderBy(doc => doc.Name)
Another option, if you really prefer the query expression syntax would be to chain your query construction across multiple statements:
var query = from r in db.RecordDocs
where r.RecordID == recordID
select new
{
DocTypeID = r.Document.DocType.DocTypeID,
Name = r.Document.DocType.Name,
Number = r.Document.DocType.Number
};
query = query.Disctinct();
query = from doc in query orderby doc.Name select doc;
Since all of these methods are deferred, this will result in the exact same execution performance.