I see Dynamic linq in below link:
ScottGu
I want to use this method to select a dynamic query like this:
I have a complex select and this way not solve my problem,
this is my select:
Select sUserName,sname, sFamily,sMobail,sid,sNumberSt,sActive,sPic,sDate from Student where {0} order by sid desc";
which {0} is a complex Condition:
sname like %somthing% and susername=N'something' and sid in (select sidfk from tablex where userteacher=N'name1')
and this condition is passed to method.
I must say that:
I don's know my condition,my condition specified with user search params.this condition that I say,Is only one example of what I want to do.
How can I do this?
Only way that solve my problem:
I send tow parameters instead of one,one for student and one for tablex:
var az = db.tablex.Where(p => p.userteacher== name1)
.Select(p => p.sidfk).ToList();
var query = db.Students.Where(textSearch).Where(s=>az.Contains(s.sid)).OrderByDescending(s => s.sid)
.Select(s => new
{
s.sUserName,
s.sname,
s.sFamily,
s.sMobail,
s.sid,
s.sNumberSt,
s.sActive,
s.sPic,
s.sDate,
});
wiche textSearch is :
sname like %somthing% and susername=N'something'
with dynamic linq
any better way is exist?
You don't need to use dynamic linq for this situation.
string paramA = "", paramB = "";
var query = from x in context.table1
where x.name == paramA
where context.table2.Where(y => y.field1 == paramB).Any(y => y.id == x.id)
select x;
Dynamic Linq usually use if in query you don't know what field will be use, so in your sample you use only params for conditions with field, so you don't ned dynamic linq
you can little optimize you query like this
var query = from student in db.Students
join teacher in db.tablex on student.sid equals teacher.sidfk
where student.sname.Contains('somthing') &&
susername=='something' &&
teacher.userteacher=='name1'
orderby s.sid descending
select new
{
s.sUserName,
s.sname,
s.sFamily,
s.sMobail,
s.sid,
s.sNumberSt,
s.sActive,
s.sPic,
s.sDate,
};
Related
I have the following linq-to-entities query with 2 joined tables that I would like to add pagination to:
IQueryable<ProductInventory> data = from inventory in objContext.ProductInventory
join variant in objContext.Variants
on inventory.VariantId equals variant.id
where inventory.ProductId == productId
where inventory.StoreId == storeId
orderby variant.SortOrder
select inventory;
I realize I need to use the .Join() extension method and then call .OrderBy().Skip().Take() to do this, I am just gettting tripped up on the syntax of Join() and can't seem to find any examples (either online or in books).
NOTE: The reason I am joining the tables is to do the sorting. If there is a better way to sort based on a value in a related table than join, please include it in your answer.
2 Possible Solutions
I guess this one is just a matter of readability, but both of these will work and are semantically identical.
1
IQueryable<ProductInventory> data = objContext.ProductInventory
.Where(y => y.ProductId == productId)
.Where(y => y.StoreId == storeId)
.Join(objContext.Variants,
pi => pi.VariantId,
v => v.id,
(pi, v) => new { Inventory = pi, Variant = v })
.OrderBy(y => y.Variant.SortOrder)
.Skip(skip)
.Take(take)
.Select(x => x.Inventory);
2
var query = from inventory in objContext.ProductInventory
where inventory.ProductId == productId
where inventory.StoreId == storeId
join variant in objContext.Variants
on inventory.VariantId equals variant.id
orderby variant.SortOrder
select inventory;
var paged = query.Skip(skip).Take(take);
Kudos to Khumesh and Pravin for helping with this. Thanks to the rest for contributing.
Define the join in your mapping, and then use it. You really don't get anything by using the Join method - instead, use the Include method. It's much nicer.
var data = objContext.ProductInventory.Include("Variant")
.Where(i => i.ProductId == productId && i.StoreId == storeId)
.OrderBy(j => j.Variant.SortOrder)
.Skip(x)
.Take(y);
Add following line to your query
var pagedQuery = data.Skip(PageIndex * PageSize).Take(PageSize);
The data variable is IQueryable, so you can put add skip & take method on it. And if you have relationship between Product & Variant, you donot really require to have join explicitly, you can refer the variant something like this
IQueryable<ProductInventory> data =
from inventory in objContext.ProductInventory
where inventory.ProductId == productId && inventory.StoreId == storeId
orderby inventory.variant.SortOrder
select new()
{
property1 = inventory.Variant.VariantId,
//rest of the properties go here
}
pagedQuery = data.Skip(PageIndex * PageSize).Take(PageSize);
My answer here based on the answer that is marked as true
but here I add a new best practice of the code above
var data= (from c in db.Categorie.AsQueryable().Join(db.CategoryMap,
cat=> cat.CategoryId, catmap => catmap.ChildCategoryId,
cat, catmap) => new { Category = cat, CategoryMap = catmap })
select (c => c.Category)
this is the best practice to use the Linq to entity because when you add AsQueryable() to your code; system will converts a generic System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable to a generic System.Linq.IQueryable which is better for .Net engine to build this query at run time
thank you Mr. Khumesh Kumawat
You would simply use your Skip(itemsInPage * pageNo).Take(itemsInPage) to do paging.
Can anyone help?
I have 1 class, basically it holds Members and within that class is a List.
The members i have in a List also... So basically it goes like this,
I have 2 members and each member has a number of sessions.
I wish to only return each member with 1 Session.
I have done a LINQ query, but of course it doesn't work...
I think i need to do a self join, any ideas?
Basically my error is m doesn't exist in my subquery self join.
var sessions =
from m in this.members
join s in
(
from se in m.Sessions
group se by se.Name into g
select new {Name = g.Key, SessioEndTime = g.Max(a=>a.SessioEndTime)}
)
on m.Name equals s.Name
select new { MemberName = m.Name, SessionTime = s.SessioEndTime}
I would appreciate any feedback anyone has.
Thanks in advance.
EDIT
Ok i managed to do it like the following, but is this the best way?
var sessions =
from m in this.members
let sn = m.Sessions.OrderByDescending(a => a.SessionEndTime).FirstOrDefault()
select new { MemberName = m.Name, SessionTime = sn.SessioEndTime}
This way sn contains 1 record, but i have access to all the properties...
But is this the best way to do using a LET?
Thanks.
Unless I am missing something you need this, no?
var sessions =
from m in members
select new {
MemberName = m.Name,
SessionTime = m.Sessions.Max(s => s.SessioEndTime)
};
You have to change the way you think about LINQ queries, think more from object point rather than from SQL implementation point. What is it that I need? I need all members, each with its latest session end time, then act on that.
EDIT:
The let option you used is ok, just keep something in mind FirstOrDefault will return null if member has an empty list of Sessions, and then sn.SessionEndTime hits null reference. If on the other hand you are certain that every member has at least one session use First instead or aggregate.
Also don't use FirstOrDefault() in the let, it kind of messes up the LINQ and prevents it from tying it to the master (causing a separate SQL query for each master to detect missing subsets), so usable queries with let are:
from m in Members
let sn = m.Sessions.Max(s => s.SessioEndTime)
select new { MemberName = m.Name, SessionTime = sn};
from m in Members
let sn = m.Sessions.OrderByDescending(a => a.SessioEndTime).First()
select new { MemberName = m.Name, SessionTime = sn.SessioEndTime};
As for ordering vs Max aggregation, both queries will generate a subquery:
-- MAX
SELECT [t0].[Name] AS [MemberName], (
SELECT MAX([t1].[SessioEndTime])
FROM [Session] AS [t1]
WHERE [t1].[memberId] = [t0].[id]
) AS [SessionTime]
FROM [Member] AS [t0]
GO
-- ordering
SELECT [t0].[Name] AS [MemberName], (
SELECT [t2].[SessioEndTime]
FROM (
SELECT TOP (1) [t1].[SessioEndTime]
FROM [Session] AS [t1]
WHERE [t1].[memberId] = [t0].[id]
ORDER BY [t1].[SessioEndTime] DESC
) AS [t2]
) AS [SessionTime]
FROM [Member] AS [t0]
With a descending index on SessioEndTime the ordering script is about twice slower (you can get execution plans for these to check for yourself), without the index its about 5times slower.
I have the following query to start with:
var query = from p in db.Products
from pc in p.NpProductCategories
where pc.CategoryId == categoryId
select p;
I'm applying some more filtering on it and in the end I want to sort the results:
if (orderBy == ProductSortingEnum.Name)
query = query.OrderBy(x => x.Name);
else
query = query.OrderBy(............);
My big problem (coming from not knowing linq too good) is the ELSE here. How can I sort results by a column that is not in the current result set? I would like to somehow link to another linq query in the orderby. The sorting I'm trying to achive is to link to NpProductVariants query using the ProductId to match between NpProductVariant and Products
and sort by the Price of the NpProductVariant
Assuming you have the relationship set up in the dbml...
For one to one (and many to one):
query = query.OrderBy(p => p.NpProductVariant.Price);
For one to many:
query = query.OrderBy(p => p.NpProductVariants.Select(v => v.Price).Max());
Also:
var query =
from p in db.Products
where p.NpProductCategories.Any(pc => pc.CategoryId == categoryId)
select p;
I think you can hook your Join to your query as long as it is returning the same thing. So maybe something like (I'm not 100 % sure since I haven't tried it):
query = from i1 in query
join i2 in query2 on i1.PropertyToJoin equals i2.PropertyToJoin
orderby i1.OrderProp1, i2.OrderProp2
select i1;
But I think it might be a good idea to check the generated sql so it is still effective.
I have a need to create a LINQ query that returns results based on a subquery. Not quite sure I'm wording that properly but the best way I know to ask is to show an example. How can I turn the following TSQL query into a LINQ query (tables are same name as objects):
SELECT CuisineId, Name
FROM Cuisine
WHERE CuisineId NOT IN (SELECT CuisineId
FROM RestaurantCuisine
WHERE RestaurantId = #id)
As you can guess, I'm trying to get a list of "available" cuisines to be listed for a user to add to a list of cuisines that a restaurant offers. The LINQ I have thus far returns ALL cuisines and doesn't take in account of the existing CuisineId's that have already been added to the other table:
I've looked all over for an example but not quite sure how to describe exactly what I need. I looked at the MSDN reference for LINQ queries but couldn't find anything like what I need:
MSDN LINQ Sample Queries
Anyone able to give me an example?
In C#:
var query =
from c in db.Cuisine
where !(from rc in db.RestaurantCuisine
where rc.RestaurantId == id
select rc.CuisineId)
.Contains(c.CuisineId)
select new {
c.CuisineId,
c.Name
};
In VB.NET:
Dim availableCuisines = _
From c In db.Cuisines _
Where Not (From rc In db.RestaurantCuisines _
Where rc.RestaurantId = id _
Select rc.CuisineId) _
.Contains(c.CuisineId) _
Select c
var cuisines = db.Cuisine.Where(c => !RestaurantCuisine.Any(
rc => rc.RestaurantId == c.Id && rc.CuisineId == c.CuisineId);
Try:
Cuisine.Where(c => !RestaurantCuisine.Select(rc => rc.CuisineID).Contains(c.CuisineID)).Select(c => c);
var query = (from c in Cuisine
where !(from rest in RestaurantCuisine
where (rest.RestaurantID == id)).Contains(c.CuisineId)
select new
{
CuisineID = c.CuisineID,
Name = c.Name
});
I am trying to write a linq query that will only return certain columns from my entity object into a list object.
Below is my code which produces an error(can't implicitly convert a generic list of anonymous types to a generic list of type TBLPROMOTION):
IQueryable<TBLPROMOTION> matches = webStoreContext.TBLPROMOTION.Include("TBLSTORE").Include("LKPROMOTIONTYPE");
List<TBLPROMOTION> promotionInfo = null;
promotionInfo = (from p in matches
orderby p.PROMOTION_NM descending
select new { p.EFFECTIVE_DT, p.EXPIRE_DT, p.IS_ACTIVE,
p.PROMOTION_DESC, p.PROMOTION_ID, p.PROMOTION_NM }).ToList();
What would be the best way to accomplish this. I do not want to do a "select p" in this case and return all the columns associated with the query.
thanks in advance,
Billy
Can't you do var promotionInfo = () and get a list of anonymous types?
Okay, basically you can not cast an Anonymous type to a known type like TBLPROMOTION.
ofcourse, you can say var promotionInfo = and then get an IEnumerable<{Anonymoustype}> and use that to do, what you were wanting to do with promotionInfo.
Also, personally I prefer the Fluent version of a linq query, easy on the eyes, good programming diet, at least for me :)
var promotionInfo = matches
.OrderByDescending( p => p.PROMOTION_NM)
.Select( p => new { p.EFFECTIVE_DT,
p.EXPIRE_DT,
p.IS_ACTIVE,
p.PROMOTION_DESC,
p.PROMOTION_ID,
p.PROMOTION_NM})
.ToList();
If you're moving from a L2E query to a Type already defined, you may need a step between. I haven't tried to compile this but something like:
List<TBLPROMOTION> promotions = new List<TBLPROMOTION>();
var results = from p in matches
orderby p.PROMOTION_NM descending
select new
{
p.EFFECTIVE_DT,
p.EXPIRE_DT,
p.IS_ACTIVE,
p.PROMOTION_DESC,
p.PROMOTION_ID,
p.PROMOTION_NM
};
foreach (var v in results)
{
promotions.Add(new TBLPROMOTION(v.EFFECTIVE_DT, v.EXPIRE_DT, v.IS_ACTIVE,
v.PROMOTION_DESC, v.PROMOTION_ID, v.PROMOTION_NM));
}
Based on the comment below, you might try something like:
foreach(var v in results)
{
TBLPROMOTION temp = new TBLPROMOTION();
temp.EFFECTIVE_DT = v.EFFECTIVE_DT;
temp.EXPIRE_DT = v.EXPIRE_DT;
temp.IS_ACTIVE = v.IS_ACTIVE
// Assign Other Properties
promotions.Add(temp);
}
.......
Sorry: Just read the addition to the top.
Are you sure that none of the fields you're leaving out (instead of saying "select p") are required for a TBLPROMOTION object? Also, sense your TBLPROMOTION object is going to have properties (and therefore memory allocated) for those skipped fields, why not just use an annonymous type or set up a helper class that contains only your needed properties?
#Billy, following code worked for me.
List<TBLPROMOTION> promotionInfo =
(from p in matches
orderby p.PROMOTION_NM descending
select new TBLPROMOTION(p.EFFECTIVE_DT, p.EXPIRE_DT, p.IS_ACTIVE,
p.PROMOTION_DESC, p.PROMOTION_ID, p.PROMOTION_NM)
).ToList();
did you try
select new TBLPROMOTION {.....
instead of
select new {.....
List<TBLPROMOTION> promotionInfo = null;
promotionInfo = (from p in matches
orderby p.PROMOTION_NM descending
select new TBLPROMOTION { COL1 = p.EFFECTIVE_DT, COL2 = p.EXPIRE_DT, COL3 = p.IS_ACTIVE... }).ToList();
Where COL1, COL2, ... are the names of the properties on TBLPROMOTION you wish you populate.
If you want a subset of the table you have 2 options:
#Fredou mentioned select new TBLPROMOTION{...}
other way is to create a custom DTO which has the exact properties & select them instead like:
List promotionInfo = ...
select new TBLPROMOTION_DTO{
Effective_dt = ...
}
HTH