Linq is brand new to me so I apologize if this is really stupid.
I am trying to get the count from a multi-table join with where clause, without group by. I've seen examples of group by and will resort to that if need be, but I am wondering if there is a way to avoid it. Is sql my query would look something like this;
SELECT Count(*)
FROM plans p
JOIN organizations o
ON p.org_id = o.org_id
AND o.deleted IS NULL
JOIN orgdata od
ON od.org_id = o.org_id
AND od.active = 1
JOIN orgsys os
ON os.sys_id = od.sys_id
AND os.deleted IS NULL
WHERE p.deleted IS NULL
AND os.name NOT IN ( 'xxxx', 'yyyy', 'zzzz' )
What's the best way to get this?
All you need is to call Count(). You're only counting the number of results. So something like:
var names = new[] { "xxxx", "yyyy", "zzzz" };
var query = from plan in db.Plans
where plan.Deleted == null
join organization in db.Organizations
on plan.OrganizationId equals organization.OrganizationId
where organization.Deleted == null
join orgData in db.OrganizationData
on organization.OrganizationId equals orgData.OrganizationId
where orgData.Active == 1
join os on db.OrganizationSystems
on orgData.SystemId equals os.SystemId
where os.Deleted == null &&
!names.Contains(os.Name)
select 1; // It doesn't matter what you select here
var count = query.Count();
Related
The following LINQ query isn't allowed when I use multiple where elements - it stops liking the 'into':
var query =
from ph in _db.PlayHits
join ua in _db.UserAgents on ph.UserAgentId equals ua.UserAgentId
where (ph.VideoId == 1 && ua.AgentString.Contains("test"))
into hits
select new
{
ResultCount = hits.Count()
};
Any idea why or how I amend this?
The equivilent sql I want is:
select count(*) as ResultCount
from Playhits ph
join UserAgents ua on ph.UserAgentId = ua.UserAgentId
where ph.VideoId = 1
and ua.AgentString like '%test%'
To my understanding, counting of the results can be done using the extension methond Count as follows.
var query =
from ph in _db.PlayHits
join ua in _db.UserAgents on ph.UserAgentId equals ua.UserAgentId
where (ph.VideoId == 1 && ua.AgentString.Contains("test"));
int Result = query.Count();
i plan to join 2 table, and get the distinct value of language column. How should i achieve that in Linq? I try add 'group' but no luck. Besides, i want to select s value too together with r distinct language value.
My code:
public ActionResult QuestionLink(int Survey_ID)
{
var query = from r in db.SURV_Question_Ext_Model
join s in db.SURV_Question_Model
on r.Qext_Question_ID equals s.Question_ID
where s.Question_Survey_ID == Survey_ID
group r.language << this is not work **
select r;
return PartialView(query.ToList());
}
This is what in MoreLinq is called DistinctBy. But if that method works on IEnumerable, so you can't use it in an EF query. But you can use the same approach:
var query = from r in db.SURV_Question_Ext_Model
join s in db.SURV_Question_Model on r.Qext_Question_ID equals s.Question_ID
where s.Question_Survey_ID == Survey_ID
group new { r, s } by r.language into grp
select grp.FirstOrDefault();
But I wonder if this really is what you want. The result depends on the ordering of languages that the database happens to return. I think you should add a predicate for a specific language and remove the grouping:
var query = from r in db.SURV_Question_Ext_Model
join s in db.SURV_Question_Model
on r.Qext_Question_ID equals s.Question_ID
where s.Question_Survey_ID == Survey_ID
&& r.language == someVariable
select new { r, s };
You can do like this:
var query = from r in db.SURV_Question_Ext_Model
join s in db.SURV_Question_Model
on r.Qext_Question_ID equals s.Question_ID
where s.Question_Survey_ID == Survey_ID
group new {r, s} by r.language into rg
select rg.Key;
I have one Linq Query. When I run the query, Only for 10 records its taking 13 seconds to extract the data to the model. I need to know the query which I wrote is good for performance or not. Please guide me what i am doing wrong.
Code
var stocktakelist = (from a in Db.Stocktakes
select new ExportStock
{
Id = a.Id,
ItemNo = a.ItemNo,
AdminId = (from admin in Db.AdminAccounts where admin.Id == a.Id select admin.Name).FirstOrDefault(),
CreatedOn = a.CreatedOn,
Status = (from items in Db.Items where items.ItemNo == a.ItemNo select items.ItemStatu.Description).FirstOrDefault(),
Title = (from tit in Db.BibContents where tit.BibId == (from bibs in Db.Items where bibs.ItemNo == a.ItemNo select bibs.BibId).FirstOrDefault() && tit.TagNo == "245" && tit.Sfld == "a" select tit.Value).FirstOrDefault() // This line of Query only makes the performance Issue
}
).ToList();
Thanks
The reason this is so slow is because it is running the 3 inner LINQ statements for every item in the outer LINQ statement.
Using LINQ joins will run only 4 queries and then link them together, which is faster.
To find out how to join, there are plenty of resources on the Internet depending on the type of LINQ you are using.
If you're retrieving this data from a SQL server, perhaps consider doing this intensive work in SQL - this is what SQL was designed for and it's much quicker than .NET. EDIT: As highlighted below, the work is done in SQL if using LINQ to SQL/Entities and using the correct join syntax.
I was trying to create the corresponding query with some joins for practice.
I cannot test it and i'm not 100% sure that this query will you get the result
you are hoping for but maybe at least it will give you a hint on how to write
joins with linq.
from a in Db.Stocktakes
join admin in Db.AdminAccounts
on a.Id equals admin.Id
into adminJoinData
from adminJoinRecord in adminJoinData.DefaultIfEmpty( )
join items in Db.Items
on a.ItemNo equals items.ItemNo
into itemsJoinData
from itemsJoinRecord in itemsJoinData.DefaultIfEmpty( )
join title in Db.BibContents
(
from subQuery in Db.BibContents
where subQuery.TagNo == "245"
where subQuery.Sfld == "a"
select subquery
)
on title.BibId equals itemsJoinRecord.BidId
into titleJoinData
from titleJoinRecord in titleJoinData.DefaultIfEmpty( )
select new ExportStock( )
{
Id = a.Id,
ItemNo = a.ItemNo,
AdminId = adminJoinRecord.Name,
CreatedOn = a.CreatedOn,
Status = itemsJoinRecord.ImemStatu.Description,
Title = titleJoinRecord.Value
}
As others have said, you should use Left Outer Joins in your LINQ just as you would if writing it in SQL.
Your query above will end up looking roughly like this once converted (this is untested, but gives the basic idea):
var a = from a in Db.Stocktakes
join admin in Db.AdminAccounts on admin.Id equals a.Id into tmpAdmin
from ad in tmpAdmin.DefaultIfEmpty()
join item in Db.Items on item.ItemNo equals a.ItemNo into tmpItem
from it in tmpItem.DefaultIfEmpty()
join title in Db.BibContents on bib.BibId equals items.BibId into tmpTitle
from ti in tmpTitle.DefaultIfEmpty()
where ti.TagNo == "245"
&& ti.Sfld == "a"
select new ExportStock
{
Id = a.Id,
ItemNo = a.ItemNo,
AdminId = ad == null ? default(int?) : ad.Id,
CreatedOn = a.CreatedOn,
Status = it == null ? default(string) : it.ItemStatus.Description,
Title = ti == null ? default(string) : ti.Value
};
Using lambda expressions your query will look like this:
Db.Stocktakes
.Join(Db.AdminAccounts, a => a.Id, b => b.Id, (a,b) => new { a, AdminId = b.Name })
.Join(Db.Items, a => a.ItemNo, b => b.ItemNo, (a,b) => new { a, Status = b.ItemStatus.Description, BidId = b.BibId })
.Join(Db.BibContents, a => a.BibId, b => b.BibId, (a,b) => new { a, Value = b.Value, TagNo = b.TagNo, Sfld = b.Sfld })
.Where(a => a.TagNo == "245" && a.Sfld == "a")
.Select(a =>
new ExportStock { Id = a.Id,
ItemNo = a.ItemNo,
AdminId = a.AdminId,
CreatedOn = a.CreatedOn,
Status = a.Status,
Title = a.Value
}
).ToList();
I have an application that successfully utilizes LINQ to perform LEFT OUTER JOINs several instances; however, in one case it fails to work as expected.
Testing in LINQPad (using LINQ-to_SQL) produced the correct result; however, to be sure I changed to the LINQPad beta version 4.42.05 and successfully connected using my application's DLL and the connectionString from its web.config file (as per the Add Connection dialog). Again, LINQPad is successful in returning the proper result and clearly generates the expected left outer join in TSQL but the same code in the application fails.
In debugging the function, I get the "Object reference not set to an instance of an object." error. Please see additional descriptions after the following code and related TSQL. Note the relationship involves customer who have one-or-more stores and whoes stores have zero-or-more departments. Therefore, some returned records will not have a department (hence the requirement for the left outer join).
The following code works perfectly in LINQPad:
var model = (from h in SalesOrderHeaders
join c in Customers on h.CustomerId equals c.CustomerId
join s in Stores on h.StoreId equals s.StoreId
join d in Departments on h.DepartmentId equals d.DepartmentId into outer
from o in outer.DefaultIfEmpty()
select new
{
OrderId = h.SalesOrderHeaderId,
OrderDetailId = 1,
SalesOrderDate = h.SalesOrderDate,
DeliveryDateTime = h.DeliveryDateTime,
Customer = c.Customer,
Store = s.Store,
Department = (o.Department == null) ? "None" : o.Department,
FullDescription = "None",
Qty = 0,
UoM = "None",
}).OrderBy (m => m.OrderId);
When the code below is used in the application it fails:
var model = from h in headers
join c in customers on h.CustomerId equals c.CustomerId
join s in stores on h.StoreId equals s.StoreId
join d in departments on h.DepartmentId equals d.DepartmentId into outer
from o in outer.DefaultIfEmpty()
select new SalesOrderGridViewModel
{
OrderId = h.SalesOrderHeaderId,
OrderDetailId = 1,
SalesOrderDate = h.SalesOrderDate,
DeliveryDateTime = h.DeliveryDateTime,
Customer = c.Name,
Store = s.Name,
Department = (o.Name == null) ? "None" : o.Name,
FullDescription = "None",
Qty = 0,
UoM = "None",
};
However, when I change the code in the application so that the boolean in the assignment of the department field of the result references the join element from the headers variable (h.DepartmentId == null) as in the following code:
var model = from h in headers
join c in customers on h.CustomerId equals c.CustomerId
join s in stores on h.StoreId equals s.StoreId
join d in departments on h.DepartmentId equals d.DepartmentId into outer
from o in outer.DefaultIfEmpty()
select new SalesOrderGridViewModel
{
OrderId = h.SalesOrderHeaderId,
OrderDetailId = 1,
SalesOrderDate = h.SalesOrderDate,
DeliveryDateTime = h.DeliveryDateTime,
Customer = c.Name,
Store = s.Name,
Department = (h.DepartmentId == null) ? "None" : o.Name,
FullDescription = "None",
Qty = 0,
UoM = "None",
};
The expected result is returned.
Interestingly the subtle difference in the TSQL generated first from the original code:
SELECT [t4].[SalesOrderHeaderId] AS [OrderId], [t4].[SalesOrderDate],
[t4].[DeliveryDateTime], [t4].[Customer], [t4].[Store],
[t4].[value] AS [Department]
FROM (
SELECT [t0].[SalesOrderHeaderId], [t0].[SalesOrderDate],
[t0].[DeliveryDateTime], [t1].[Customer], [t2].[Store],
(CASE
WHEN [t3].[Department] IS NOT NULL THEN [t3].[Department]
ELSE CONVERT(NVarChar(50),#p0)
END) AS [value]
FROM [SalesOrderHeaders] AS [t0]
INNER JOIN [Customers] AS [t1] ON [t0].[CustomerId] = [t1].[CustomerId]
INNER JOIN [Stores] AS [t2] ON [t0].[StoreId] = ([t2].[StoreId])
LEFT OUTER JOIN [Departments] AS [t3]
ON [t0].[DepartmentId] = ([t3].[DepartmentId])) AS [t4]
ORDER BY [t4].[SalesOrderHeaderId]
And here from the revised code, where the boolean was changed to test the value of the DepartmentId in the original headers table ([t3].[Department] versus [t0].[DepartmentId] ), appears to be the solution:
SELECT [t4].[SalesOrderHeaderId] AS [OrderId], [t4].[SalesOrderDate],
[t4].[DeliveryDateTime], [t4].[Customer], [t4].[Store],
[t4].[value] AS [Department]
FROM (
SELECT [t0].[SalesOrderHeaderId], [t0].[SalesOrderDate],
[t0].[DeliveryDateTime], [t1].[Customer], [t2].[Store],
(CASE
WHEN [t0].[DepartmentId] IS NOT NULL THEN [t3].[Department]
ELSE CONVERT(NVarChar(50),#p0)
END) AS [value]
FROM [SalesOrderHeaders] AS [t0]
INNER JOIN [Customers] AS [t1] ON [t0].[CustomerId] = [t1].[CustomerId]
INNER JOIN [Stores] AS [t2] ON [t0].[StoreId] = ([t2].[StoreId])
LEFT OUTER JOIN [Departments] AS [t3]
ON [t0].[DepartmentId] = ([t3].[DepartmentId])) AS [t4]
ORDER BY [t4].[SalesOrderHeaderId]
While I have found a way to make this work; because it works both ways in LINQPad and successfully in numerous other LINQ queries scattered throughout my application, its failure in the original form in this one location gives me concern.
Ultimately, it appears to fail in the application when I test the returned value of the left outer join. However, this is the documented practice in many books and articles. So my final question is does anyone have any insight into why this would occur and/or how it can work in LINQPad (using the applications DLL and against the same DB)?
This is a classic example of how not to write LINQ queries - thinking in SQL and then transliterating into LINQ.
With LINQ, you can avoid the joins completely and formulate your query as follows:
from h in SalesOrderHeaders
orderby h.OrderId
select new
{
OrderId = h.SalesOrderHeaderId,
OrderDetailId = 1,
SalesOrderDate = h.SalesOrderDate,
DeliveryDateTime = h.DeliveryDateTime,
c.Customer.Customer,
s.Store.Store,
Department = (h.Department == null) ? "None" : h.Department.Department,
FullDescription = "None",
Qty = 0,
UoM = "None"
}
It appears that [t0].DepartmentID (from SalesOrderHeaders) can be null. Your LEFT OUTER JOIN relies on this value. This ends up comparing [t3].DepartmentID to null (in some cases).
You might need to use your CASE statement from the select in the JOIN as well.
I have the following view:-
CREATE VIEW tbl_adjudicator_result_view
AS
SELECT a.adjudicator_id, sar.section_adjudicator_role_id, s.section_id, sdr.section_dance_role_id, d.dance_id, c.contact_id,
ro.round_id, r.result_id, c.title, c.first_name, c.last_name, d.name, r.value, ro.type
FROM tbl_adjudicator a
INNER JOIN tbl_section_adjudicator_role sar on sar.section_adjudicator_role2adjudicator = a.adjudicator_id
INNER JOIN tbl_section s on sar.section_adjudicator_role2section = s.section_id
INNER JOIN tbl_section_dance_role sdr on sdr.section_dance_role2section = s.section_id
INNER JOIN tbl_dance d on sdr.section_dance_role2dance = d.dance_id
INNER JOIN tbl_contact c on a.adjudicator2contact = c.contact_id
INNER JOIN tbl_round ro on ro.round2section = s.section_id
LEFT OUTER JOIN tbl_result r on r.result2adjudicator = a.adjudicator_id AND r.result2dance = d.dance_id
When I run the following query directly against the db I get 0 in the count column where there is no result
select adjudicator_id, first_name, COUNT(result_id)
from tbl_adjudicator_result_view arv
where arv.round_id = 16
group by adjudicator_id, first_name
However when I use LINQ query I always get 1 in the Count Column
var query = from arv in db.AdjudicatorResultViews
where arv.round_id == id
group arv by new { arv.adjudicator_id, arv.first_name} into grp
select new AdjudicatorResultViewGroupedByDance
{
AdjudicatorId = grp.Key.adjudicator_id,
FirstName = grp.Key.first_name,
Count = grp.Select(p => p.result_id).Distinct().Count()
};
What do I need to change in the View / Linq query.
You're not doing the same thing in the LINQ query as in the SQL. COUNT(result_id) does not count distinct values of result_id - it counts non-null values.
Try this instead:
Count = grp.Select(p => p.result_id).Where(x => x != null).Count()
The point is: you're grouping your data in the LINQ query - and you'll always get at least one group.
That group's Count may be 0 - but the count of groups will be 1.