I'm trying out Dapper with Oracle and I was trying to run a multi-resultset query but Oracle requires a dbtype of refcursor.
StringBuilder query = new StringBuilder("BEGIN ");
query.Append("OPEN :rs1 FOR SELECT * FROM Table1 where key=:KEY; ");
query.Append("OPEN :rs2 FOR SELECT * FROM Table2 where key=:KEY; ");
query.Append("END;");
Is there a way to pass an OracleParameter (maybe as DbParameter?) to Dapper? When I tried, it threw an error.
What is the advantage of using the DynamicParameter vs. using a DbParameter (assuming types are known etc.)?
A new interface was added in the most recent build that allows more control over the parameter - it was added to support TVPs in SQL server, but should work in this scenario. However, I'm also fairly content to add special casing for any types that look like dbparameter - and add them directly, which would allow you to add an oracleparameter directly.
DynamicParameters is about how many parameters to add, so it is a bit orthogonal to the value vs DbParameter discussion. At the moment, the code generally prefers to take control of adding parameters itself, so the caller just knows "an int named id with value 7" - not any ado.net details. But it could do.
Edit: if you really want to work with lists-of-parameters (i.e. List<DbParameter> etc), then you can do that with something like:
public class DbParams : Dapper.SqlMapper.IDynamicParameters,
IEnumerable<IDbDataParameter>
{
private readonly List<IDbDataParameter> parameters =
new List<IDbDataParameter>();
public IEnumerator<IDbDataParameter> GetEnumerator() {
return parameters.GetEnumerator(); }
IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() { return GetEnumerator(); }
public void Add(IDbDataParameter value)
{
parameters.Add(value);
}
void Dapper.SqlMapper.IDynamicParameters.AddParameters(IDbCommand command,
Dapper.SqlMapper.Identity identity)
{
foreach (IDbDataParameter parameter in parameters)
command.Parameters.Add(parameter);
}
}
with usage like:
public void TestCustomParameters()
{
var args = new DbParams {
new SqlParameter("foo", 123),
new SqlParameter("bar", "abc")
};
var result = connection.Query("select Foo=#foo, Bar=#bar", args).Single();
int foo = result.Foo;
string bar = result.Bar;
foo.IsEqualTo(123);
bar.IsEqualTo("abc");
}
which passes the test.
However, I must stress that I would prefer not to encumber the calling code with db-parameter knowledge unless it really really needs to know; I would by-far prefer:
var args = new {
foo = 123, bar = "abc"
};
which does exactly the same thing, but without dropping to ADO.NET; this can be especially important if you are using a "decorated" ADO.NET connection (for example, mini-profiler) - in which case the layer you get is not an OracleCommand / OracleConnection etc - it is abstracted. This means that forcibly adding an OracleParameter may not always work - but adding a parameter with name "foo" and value 123 - that is pretty reliable.
Related
I'm looking for an elegant way to execute a Contains() statement in a scalable way. Please allow me to give some background before I come to the actual question.
The IN statement
In Entity Framework and LINQ to SQL the Contains statement is translated as a SQL IN statement. For instance, from this statement:
var ids = Enumerable.Range(1,10);
var courses = Courses.Where(c => ids.Contains(c.CourseID)).ToList();
Entity Framework will generate
SELECT
[Extent1].[CourseID] AS [CourseID],
[Extent1].[Title] AS [Title],
[Extent1].[Credits] AS [Credits],
[Extent1].[DepartmentID] AS [DepartmentID]
FROM [dbo].[Course] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[CourseID] IN (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)
Unfortunately, the In statement is not scalable. As per MSDN:
Including an extremely large number of values (many thousands) in an IN clause can consume resources and return errors 8623 or 8632
which has to do with running out of resources or exceeding expression limits.
But before these errors occur, the IN statement becomes increasingly slow with growing numbers of items. I can't find documentation about its growth rate, but it performs well up to a few thousands of items, but beyond that it gets dramatically slow. (Based on SQL Server experiences).
Scalable
We can't always avoid this statement. A JOIN with the source data in stead would generally perform much better, but that's only possible when the source data is in the same context. Here I'm dealing with data coming from a client in a disconnected scenario. So I have been looking for a scalable solution. A satisfactory approach turned out to be cutting the operation into chunks:
var courses = ids.ToChunks(1000)
.Select(chunk => Courses.Where(c => chunk.Contains(c.CourseID)))
.SelectMany(x => x).ToList();
(where ToChunks is this little extension method).
This executes the query in chunks of 1000 that all perform well enough. With e.g. 5000 items, 5 queries will run that together are likely to be faster than one query with 5000 items.
But not DRY
But of course I don't want to scatter this construct all over my code. I am looking for an extension method by which any IQueryable<T> can be transformed into a chunky executing statement. Ideally something like this:
var courses = Courses.Where(c => ids.Contains(c.CourseID))
.AsChunky(1000)
.ToList();
But maybe this
var courses = Courses.ChunkyContains(c => c.CourseID, ids, 1000)
.ToList();
I've given the latter solution a first shot:
public static IEnumerable<TEntity> ChunkyContains<TEntity, TContains>(
this IQueryable<TEntity> query,
Expression<Func<TEntity,TContains>> match,
IEnumerable<TContains> containList,
int chunkSize = 500)
{
return containList.ToChunks(chunkSize)
.Select (chunk => query.Where(x => chunk.Contains(match)))
.SelectMany(x => x);
}
Obviously, the part x => chunk.Contains(match) doesn't compile. But I don't know how to manipulate the match expression into a Contains expression.
Maybe someone can help me make this solution work. And of course I'm open to other approaches to make this statement scalable.
I’ve solved this problem with a little different approach a view month ago. Maybe it’s a good solution for you too.
I didn’t want my solution to change the query itself. So a ids.ChunkContains(p.Id) or a special WhereContains method was unfeasible. Also should the solution be able to combine a Contains with another filter as well as using the same collection multiple times.
db.TestEntities.Where(p => (ids.Contains(p.Id) || ids.Contains(p.ParentId)) && p.Name.StartsWith("Test"))
So I tried to encapsulate the logic in a special ToList method that could rewrite the Expression for a specified collection to be queried in chunks.
var ids = Enumerable.Range(1, 11);
var result = db.TestEntities.Where(p => Ids.Contains(p.Id) && p.Name.StartsWith ("Test"))
.ToChunkedList(ids,4);
To rewrite the expression tree I discovered all Contains Method calls from local collections in the query with a view helping classes.
private class ContainsExpression
{
public ContainsExpression(MethodCallExpression methodCall)
{
this.MethodCall = methodCall;
}
public MethodCallExpression MethodCall { get; private set; }
public object GetValue()
{
var parent = MethodCall.Object ?? MethodCall.Arguments.FirstOrDefault();
return Expression.Lambda<Func<object>>(parent).Compile()();
}
public bool IsLocalList()
{
Expression parent = MethodCall.Object ?? MethodCall.Arguments.FirstOrDefault();
while (parent != null) {
if (parent is ConstantExpression)
return true;
var member = parent as MemberExpression;
if (member != null) {
parent = member.Expression;
} else {
parent = null;
}
}
return false;
}
}
private class FindExpressionVisitor<T> : ExpressionVisitor where T : Expression
{
public List<T> FoundItems { get; private set; }
public FindExpressionVisitor()
{
this.FoundItems = new List<T>();
}
public override Expression Visit(Expression node)
{
var found = node as T;
if (found != null) {
this.FoundItems.Add(found);
}
return base.Visit(node);
}
}
public static List<T> ToChunkedList<T, TValue>(this IQueryable<T> query, IEnumerable<TValue> list, int chunkSize)
{
var finder = new FindExpressionVisitor<MethodCallExpression>();
finder.Visit(query.Expression);
var methodCalls = finder.FoundItems.Where(p => p.Method.Name == "Contains").Select(p => new ContainsExpression(p)).Where(p => p.IsLocalList()).ToList();
var localLists = methodCalls.Where(p => p.GetValue() == list).ToList();
If the local collection passed in the ToChunkedList method was found in the query expression, I replace the Contains call to the original list with a new call to a temporary list containing the ids for one batch.
if (localLists.Any()) {
var result = new List<T>();
var valueList = new List<TValue>();
var containsMethod = typeof(Enumerable).GetMethods(BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.Public)
.Single(p => p.Name == "Contains" && p.GetParameters().Count() == 2)
.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(TValue));
var queryExpression = query.Expression;
foreach (var item in localLists) {
var parameter = new List<Expression>();
parameter.Add(Expression.Constant(valueList));
if (item.MethodCall.Object == null) {
parameter.AddRange(item.MethodCall.Arguments.Skip(1));
} else {
parameter.AddRange(item.MethodCall.Arguments);
}
var call = Expression.Call(containsMethod, parameter.ToArray());
var replacer = new ExpressionReplacer(item.MethodCall,call);
queryExpression = replacer.Visit(queryExpression);
}
var chunkQuery = query.Provider.CreateQuery<T>(queryExpression);
for (int i = 0; i < Math.Ceiling((decimal)list.Count() / chunkSize); i++) {
valueList.Clear();
valueList.AddRange(list.Skip(i * chunkSize).Take(chunkSize));
result.AddRange(chunkQuery.ToList());
}
return result;
}
// if the collection was not found return query.ToList()
return query.ToList();
Expression Replacer:
private class ExpressionReplacer : ExpressionVisitor {
private Expression find, replace;
public ExpressionReplacer(Expression find, Expression replace)
{
this.find = find;
this.replace = replace;
}
public override Expression Visit(Expression node)
{
if (node == this.find)
return this.replace;
return base.Visit(node);
}
}
Please allow me to provide an alternative to the Chunky approach.
The technique involving Contains in your predicate works well for:
A constant list of values (no volatile).
A small list of values.
Contains will do great if your local data has those two characteristics because these small set of values will be hardcoded in the final SQL query.
The problem begins when your list of values has entropy (non-constant). As of this writing, Entity Framework (Classic and Core) do not try to parameterize these values in any way, this forces SQL Server to generate a query plan every time it sees a new combination of values in your query. This operation is expensive and gets aggravated by the overall complexity of your query (e.g. many tables, a lot of values in the list, etc.).
The Chunky approach still suffers from this SQL Server query plan cache pollution problem, because it does not parametrizes the query, it just moves the cost of creating a big execution plan into smaller ones that are more easy to compute (and discard) by SQL Server, furthermore, every chunk adds an additional round-trip to the database, which increases the time needed to resolve the query.
An Efficient Solution for EF Core
🎉 NEW! QueryableValues EF6 Edition has arrived!
For EF Core keep reading below.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a way of composing local data in your query in a way that's SQL Server friendly? Enter QueryableValues.
I designed this library with these two main goals:
It MUST solve the SQL Server's query plan cache pollution problem ✅
It MUST be fast! ⚡
It has a flexible API that allows you to compose local data provided by an IEnumerable<T> and you get back an IQueryable<T>; just use it as if it were another entity of your DbContext (really), e.g.:
// Sample values.
IEnumerable<int> values = Enumerable.Range(1, 1000);
// Using a Join (query syntax).
var query1 =
from e in dbContext.MyEntities
join v in dbContext.AsQueryableValues(values) on e.Id equals v
select new
{
e.Id,
e.Name
};
// Using Contains (method syntax)
var query2 = dbContext.MyEntities
.Where(e => dbContext.AsQueryableValues(values).Contains(e.Id))
.Select(e => new
{
e.Id,
e.Name
});
You can also compose complex types!
It goes without saying that the provided IEnumerable<T> is only enumerated at the time that your query is materialized (not before), preserving the same behavior of EF Core in this regard.
How Does It Works?
Internally QueryableValues creates a parameterized query and provides your values in a serialized format that is natively understood by SQL Server. This allows your query to be resolved with a single round-trip to the database and avoids creating a new query plan on subsequent executions due to the parameterized nature of it.
Useful Links
Nuget Package
GitHub Repository
Benchmarks
SQL Server Cache Pollution Problem
QueryableValues is distributed under the MIT license
Linqkit to the rescue! Might be a better way that does it directly, but this seems to work fine and makes it pretty clear what's being done. The addition being AsExpandable(), which lets you use the Invoke extension.
using LinqKit;
public static IEnumerable<TEntity> ChunkyContains<TEntity, TContains>(
this IQueryable<TEntity> query,
Expression<Func<TEntity,TContains>> match,
IEnumerable<TContains> containList,
int chunkSize = 500)
{
return containList
.ToChunks(chunkSize)
.Select (chunk => query.AsExpandable()
.Where(x => chunk.Contains(match.Invoke(x))))
.SelectMany(x => x);
}
You might also want to do this:
containsList.Distinct()
.ToChunks(chunkSize)
...or something similar so you don't get duplicate results if something this occurs:
query.ChunkyContains(x => x.Id, new List<int> { 1, 1 }, 1);
Another way would be to build the predicate this way (of course, some parts should be improved, just giving the idea).
public static Expression<Func<TEntity, bool>> ContainsPredicate<TEntity, TContains>(this IEnumerable<TContains> chunk, Expression<Func<TEntity, TContains>> match)
{
return Expression.Lambda<Func<TEntity, bool>>(Expression.Call(
typeof (Enumerable),
"Contains",
new[]
{
typeof (TContains)
},
Expression.Constant(chunk, typeof(IEnumerable<TContains>)), match.Body),
match.Parameters);
}
which you could call in your ChunkContains method
return containList.ToChunks(chunkSize)
.Select(chunk => query.Where(ContainsPredicate(chunk, match)))
.SelectMany(x => x);
Using a stored procedure with a table valued parameter could also work well. You in effect write a joint In the stored procedure between your table / view and the table valued parameter.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/data/adonet/sql/table-valued-parameters
Inspired by this post dynamic-repositories-in-lightspeed I am trying to build my own like this.
I have a abstract GenericRepository like this. I have omitted most of the code for simplicity (Its just normal Add/Update/Filtering methods).
public abstract class GenericRepository<TEntity, TContext> :
DynamicObject,
IDataRepository<TEntity>
where TEntity : class, new()
where TContext : DbContext, new()
{
protected TContext context;
protected DbSet<TEntity> DbSet;
}
As you can see, my abstract GenericRepository extends from DynamicObject to support dynamic repositories.
I also have a abstract UnitOfWork implementation which generated a repository for a given entity at runtime like this. Again, base classes and other details are irrelevant for the question, but I'm happy to provide them if you require.
public abstract class UnitOfWorkBase<TContext> : IUnitOfWork
where TContext : DbContext, new()
{
public abstract IDataRepository<T> Repository<T>()
where T : class, IIdentifiableEntity, new();
// Code
}
Following class implements abstract method of the above class.
public class MyUnitOfWorkBase : UnitOfWorkBase<MyDataContext>
{
public override IDataRepository<T> Repository<T>()
{
if (Repositories == null)
Repositories = new Hashtable();
var type = typeof(T).Name;
if (!Repositories.ContainsKey(type))
{
var repositoryType = typeof(GenericRepositoryImpl<,>);
var genericType = repositoryType.MakeGenericType(typeof(T), typeof(InTeleBillContext));
var repositoryInstance = Activator.CreateInstance(genericType);
Repositories.Add(type, repositoryInstance);
}
return (IDataRepository<T>)Repositories[type];
}
}
Now, whenever I want to create a dynamic repository for basic CRUD functions, I can do it like this.
var uow = new MyUnitOfWorkBase();
var settingsRepo = uow.Repository<Settings>();
var settingsList = settingsRepo.Get().ToList();
Now, What I want to do is something like this.
dynamic settingsRepo = uow.Repository<Settings>();
var result = settingsRepo.FindSettingsByCustomerNumber(774278L);
Here, FindSettingsByCustomerNumber() is a dynamic method. I resolve this method using this code.
public class GenericRepositoryImpl<TEntity, TContext> :
GenericRepository<TEntity, TContext>
where TEntity : class, IIdentifiableEntity, new()
where TContext : DbContext, new()
{
public override bool TryInvokeMember(InvokeMemberBinder binder,
object[] args, out object result)
{
// Crude parsing for simplicity
if (binder.Name.StartsWith("Find"))
{
int byIndex = binder.Name.IndexOf("By");
if (byIndex >= 0)
{
string collectionName = binder.Name.Substring(4, byIndex - 4);
string[] attributes = binder.Name.Substring(byIndex + 2)
.Split(new[] { "And" }, StringSplitOptions.None);
var items = DbSet.ToList();
Func<TEntity, bool> predicate = entity => entity.GetType().GetProperty(attributes[0]).GetValue(entity).Equals(args[0]);
result = items.Where(predicate).ToList();
return true;
}
}
return base.TryInvokeMember(binder, args, out result);
}
}
This is the problem I am having.
using this line var items = DbSet.ToList(); works well, but if I were to query a large table with 1000's of data, then performance issues occur.
If I directly try to use the IQueryble interface and call it like this
Func predicate = entity => entity.GetType().GetProperty(attributes[0]).GetValue(entity).Equals(args[0]);
result = DbSet.Where(predicate).ToList();
It gives me an error saying there is no method GetProperty() in LINQ to Entities.
Is it possible to make it work using LINQ to Entities?
You need to know that LINQ-to-Entities needs to convert your expression (given by the predicate) into a SQL query. entity is replaced by the database column. Additionally LINQ2Entities supports various expressions (e.g. EqualExpression, etc.). However it cannot support the whole .NET Framework. Especially: what should GetType() on a database column return?
Therefore you need to use the Expresson API to generate the predicate and use only expressions supported by LINQ2Entities. For example: Use a MemberAccess expression for accessing a property (LINQ2Entities is able to map that to an SQL query).
Hint: we are doing predicate generation for Entity Framework and had to overcome some additional problems which we could solve using the library LinqKit.
If you do not know about the .NET Expression API yet, you need to gather skills in that area before you can resume your dynamic repository idea.
BTW: I don't think that it is a very good idea to have this kind of automatic calls. They are not refactoring safe (i.e. what if you rename the DB column? All your method calls run into problems, and it is not detectable by the compiler).
I would use it only to generate predicates for Where() clauses from Filter-like DTO types.
Unusual pattern - dynamic methods on a repository patterns.But that is another topic.
Dynamic invocation of the repository you have.
So now you need to understand Linq to Entities a little more.
Linq to Entities language reference what you can do with linq to Entities.
Given the expression tree has to be converted in to DB instructions,
it isnt surprising there are restrictions.
In case you are interested The EF provider specs and links to samples
So given you want to Dynamic EF, you have a few options.
I concentrate on dynamic wheres, but you can apply to other EF methods.
Check out
Dynamic Linq on codeplex
which allows things like
public virtual IQueryable<TPoco> DynamicWhere(string predicate, params object[] values) {
return Context.Set<TPoco>().Where(predicate, values);
}
This Where is an IQueryable extension that accepts strings...
Samples of using this string based predicate parser
LinqKit or even PM> Install-Package LinqKit
Linqkit takes dynamic EF to the next level,
Offers amazing features like
public IQueryable<TPoco> AsExpandable() {
return Context.Set<TPoco>().AsExpandable();
}
which allows you build AND and ORs progressively.
Expression trees
Expression Building API is the most powerful tool to support you here .
Learning the API is hard. using the tool harder.
eg Dealing with concatenation very hard. BUT if you can understand the API and how expressions work.
It is possible.
Here is a SIMPLE example. (imagine something complex)
public static Expression<Func<TPoco, bool>> GetContainsPredicate<TPoco>(string propertyName,
string containsValue)
{
// (tpoco t) => t.propertyName.Contains(value ) is built
var parameterExp = Expression.Parameter(typeof(TPoco), #"t");
var propertyExp = Expression.Property(parameterExp, propertyName);
MethodInfo method = typeof(string).GetMethod(#"Contains", new[] { typeof(string) });
var someValue = Expression.Constant(containsValue, typeof(string));
var containsMethodExp = Expression.Call(propertyExp, method, someValue);
return Expression.Lambda<Func<TPoco, bool>>(containsMethodExp, parameterExp);
}
I am trying to send a Linq query as a string to a method to be used in a where clause. Since IEnumerable wouldn't work for this, I have converted my IEnumerable to IQueryable and still it throws error. The following is the code:
public static void FilterData(string Query)
{
if((List<MemberMaintenanceData>)HttpContext.Current.Session["Allmembers"] != null)
{
//Get the IEnumerable object colection from session
var data = (List<MemberMaintenanceData>) HttpContext.Current.Session["Allmembers"];
//Convert it to IQueryable
IQueryable<MemberMaintenanceData> queryData = data.AsQueryable();
//This line doesn't compile!!
queryData = queryData.Where(Query);
HttpContext.Current.Session["Allmembers"] = queryData.AsEnumerable().ToList();
}
}
I intended passing "a => a.AccountId == 1000" as Query
There is a free (and open source) library, provided by Microsoft for parsing strings into Lambda expressions that can then be used in Linq queries. It also contains versions of the standard query operators such as Where() that take a string parameter. You can find it described in Scott Guthries blog post on Dynamic Linq.
For example, you can do queries like this (adapted from a snippet from the Scott guthrie link)
// imagine these have come from a drop down box or some other user input...
string thingToSelectBy = "City";
string citySelectedByUser = "London";
int minNumberOfOrders = 10;
string whereClause = String.Format("{0} = #0 and Orders.Count >= #1", thingToSelectBy);
var query = db.Customers
.Where(whereClause, citySelectedByUser, minNumberOfOrders)
.OrderBy("CompanyName")
.Select("new(CompanyName as Name, Phone");
The Where clause in thisw code snippet shows how you create a where clause using a parameterised string and then dynamically inject values for the parameters at run time, for example, based on user input. This works for parameters of any type.
In your example, the where clause would be
whereClause = "AccountId = 1000";
So in effect you would be doing something like
var newFilteredQueryData = queryData.Where("AccountId = 1000");
That link also contains the location where you can download the source code and a comprehensive document describing the dynamic query API and expression language.
Given a class such as:
public class foo
{
public int AccountID {get;set;}
}
You should be able to do something like this:
Expression<Func<foo, bool>> filter = f => f.AccountID == 1000;
And then pass that as your query. If it is really needed as a string you can do this:
filter.ToString();
//By Using this library
using System.Linq.Dynamic.Core;
InventoryList = Repository.GetAll(); // IQueryable
string filterString = "UnitPrice > 10 And Qty>100 OR Description.Contains("Dairy")";
var filteredGenericList = InventoryList.Where(filterString);
I am using Entity Framework 4.0 and trying to use the "Contains" function of one the object sets in my context object. to do so i coded a Comparer class:
public class RatingInfoComparer : IEqualityComparer<RatingInfo>
{
public bool Equals(RatingInfo x, RatingInfo y)
{
var a = new {x.PlugInID,x.RatingInfoUserIP};
var b = new {y.PlugInID,y.RatingInfoUserIP};
if(a.PlugInID == b.PlugInID && a.RatingInfoUserIP.Equals(b.RatingInfoUserIP))
return true;
else
return false;
}
public int GetHashCode(RatingInfo obj)
{
var a = new { obj.PlugInID, obj.RatingInfoUserIP };
if (Object.ReferenceEquals(obj, null))
return 0;
return a.GetHashCode();
}
}
when i try to use the comparer with this code:
public void SaveRatingInfo2(int plugInId, string userInfo)
{
RatingInfo ri = new RatingInfo()
{
PlugInID = plugInId,
RatingInfoUser = userInfo,
RatingInfoUserIP = "192.168.1.100"
};
//This is where i get the execption
if (!context.RatingInfoes.Contains<RatingInfo>(ri, new RatingInfoComparer()))
{
//my Entity Framework context object
context.RatingInfoes.AddObject(ri);
context.SaveChanges();
}
}
i get an execption:
"LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'Boolean Contains[RatingInfo](System.Linq.IQueryable1[OlafCMSLibrary.Models.RatingInfo], OlafCMSLibrary.Models.RatingInfo,
System.Collections.Generic.IEqualityComparer1[OlafCMSLibrary.Models.RatingInfo])' method, and his method cannot be translated into a store expression."
Since i am not proficient with linQ and Entity Framework i might be making a mistake with my use of the "var" either in the "GetHashCode" function or in general.
If my mistake is clear to you do tell me :) it does not stop my project! but it is essential for me to understand why a simple comparer doesnt work.
Thanks
Aaron
LINQ to Entities works by converting an expression tree into queries against an object model through the IQueryable interface. This means than you can only put things into the expression tree which LINQ to Entities understands.
It doesn't understand the Contains method you are using, so it throws the exception you see. Here is a list of methods which it understands.
Under the Set Methods section header, it lists Contains using an item as supported, but it lists Contains with an IEqualityComparer as not supported. This is presumably because it would have to be able to work out how to convert your IEqualityComparer into a query against the object model, which would be difficult. You might be able to do what you want using multiple Where clauses, see which ones are supported further up the document.
I have IQueryable object and I need to take the data inside the IQueryable to put it into Textboxs controls. Is this possible?
I try something like:
public void setdata (IQueryable mydata)
{
textbox1.text = mydata.????
}
Update:
I'm doing this:
public IQueryable getData(String tableName, Hashtable myparams)
{
decimal id = 0;
if (myparams.ContainsKey("id") == true)
id = (decimal)myparams["id"];
Type myType= Type.GetType("ORM_Linq." + tableName + ", ORM_Linq");
return this.GetTable(tableName , "select * from Articu where id_tipo_p = '" + id + "'");
}
public IQueryable<T> GetTable<T>(System.Linq.Expressions.Expression<Func<T, bool>> predicate) where T : class
{
return _datacontext.GetTable<T>().Where(predicate);
}
This returns a {System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.SqlProvider+OneTimeEnumerable1[ORM_Linq.Articu]}`
I don't see any method like you tell me. I see Cast<>, Expression, ToString...
EDIT: Updated based on additional info from your other posts...
Your getData method is returning IQueryable instead of a strongly typed result, which is why you end up casting it. Try changing it to:
public IQueryable<ORM_Linq.Articu> getData(...)
Are you trying to query for "Articu" from different tables?
With the above change in place, your code can be rewritten as follows:
ORM_Linq.Articu result = mydata.SingleOrDefault();
if (result != null)
{
TextBoxCode.Text = result.id.ToString();
TextBoxName.Text = result.descrip;
}
If you have a single result use SingleOrDefault which will return a default value if no results are returned:
var result = mydata.SingleOrDefault();
if (result != null)
{
textbox1.text = result.ProductName; // use the column name
}
else
{
// do something
}
If you have multiple results then loop over them:
foreach (var item in mydata)
{
string name = item.ProductName;
int id = item.ProductId;
// etc..
}
First, you should be using a strongly-typed version of IQueryable. Say that your objects are of type MyObject and that MyObject has a property called Name of type string. Then, first change the parameter mydata to be of type IQueryable<MyObject>:
public void setdata (IQueryable<MyObject> mydata)
Then we can write a body like so to actually get some data out of. Let's say that we just want the first result from the query:
public void setdata (IQueryable<MyObject> mydata) {
MyObject first = mydata.FirstOrDefault();
if(first != null) {
textbox1.Text = first.Name;
}
}
Or, if you want to concatenate all the names:
public void setdata(IQueryable<MyObject> mydata) {
string text = String.Join(", ", mydata.Select(x => x.Name).ToArray());
textbo1.Text = text;
}
Well, as the name suggests, an object implementing IQueryable is... Queryable! You'll need to write a linq query to get at the internal details of your IQueryable object. In your linq query you'll be able to pull out its data and assign bits of it where ever you'd like - like your text box.
Here's a great starting place for learning Linq.
I think you find the same mental struggle when coming from FoxPro and from DataSet. Really nice, powerful string-based capabilities(sql for query, access to tables and columns name) in these worlds are not available, but replaced with a compiled, strongly-typed set of capabilities.
This is very nice if you are statically defining the UI for search and results display against a data source known at compile time. Not so nice if you are trying to build a system which attaches to existing data sources known only at runtime and defined by configuration data.
If you expect only one value just call FirstOrDefault() method.
public void setdata (IQueryable mydata)
{
textbox1.text = mydata.FirstOrDefault().PropertyName;
}