I've an 'product' object that has to update a record in db.
Through a 'productCode' I retrieve the object to update using Linq.
Which is the most elegant way to overwrite alle the property but not the key one and then save changes?
You will need to access each property anyways, as you fetch a record manually. my recommendation for easiest, fastest and cleanest code:
code = productCode_toChange
using(Entity ent = new Entity())
{
var update = (from x in ent.Products where x.productCode == code select x).First();
update.property1 = product.property1;
update.property2 = product.property2;
// and so on for each property you change
ent.SaveChanges();
}
you could of course try:
using(Entity ent = new Entity())
{
var update = (from x in ent.Products where x.productCode == code select x).First();
update = product;
ent.SaveChanges();
}
but i can almost guarantee this will not work, as product will certainly have an id-property it will try to write to update, which will throw an exception, given the case product is the LINQ-generated type for the table-instance.
Be careful to check for type-conformity. also note, that you the SQL-Type of product code should not be text, as this type is incomparable
Related
I have some errors using Linq on DataTable and I couldn't figure it out how to solve it. I have to admit that i am pretty new to Linq and I searched the forum and Internet and couldn't figure it out. hope you can help.
I have a DataTable called campaign with three columns: ID (int), Product (string), Channel (string). The DataTable is already filled with data. I am trying to select a subset of the campaign records which satisfied the conditions selected by the end user. For example, the user want to list only if the Product is either 'EWH' or 'HEC'. The selection criteria is dynaically determined by the end user.
I have the following C# code:
private void btnClick()
{
IEnumerable<DataRow> query =
from zz in campaign.AsEnumerable()
orderby zz.Field<string>("ID")
select zz;
string whereClause = "zz.Field<string>(\"Product\") in ('EWH','HEC')";
query = query.Where(whereClause);
DataTable sublist = query.CopyToDataTable<DataRow>();
}
But it gives me an error on line: query = query.Where(whereClause), saying
No property or field 'zz' exists in type 'DataRow'".
If I changed to:
string whereClause = "Product in ('EWH','HEC')"; it will say:
No property or field 'Product' exists in type 'DataRow'
Can anyone help me on how to solve this problem? I feel it could be a pretty simple syntax change, but I just don't know at this time.
First, this line has an error
orderby zz.Field<string>("ID")
because as you said, your ID column is of type int.
Second, you need to learn LINQ query syntax. Forget about strings, the same way you used from, orderby, select in the query, you can also use where and many other operators. Also you'll need to learn the equivalent LINQ constructs for SQL-ish things, like for instance IN (...) is mapped to Enumerable.Contains etc.
With all that being said, here is your query
var productFilter = new[] { "EWH", "HEC" };
var query =
from zz in campaign.AsEnumerable()
where productFilter.Contains(zz.Field<string>("Product"))
orderby zz.Field<int>("ID")
select zz;
Update As per your comment, if you want to make this dynamic, then you need to switch to lambda syntax. Multiple and criteria can be composed by chaining multiple Where clauses like this
List<string> productFilter = ...; // coming from outside
List<string> channelFilter = ...; // coming from outside
var query = campaign.AsEnumerable();
// Apply filters if needed
if (productFilter != null && productFilter.Count > 0)
query = query.Where(zz => productFilter.Contains(zz.Field<string>("Product")));
if (channelFilter != null && channelFilter.Count > 0)
query = query.Where(zz => channelFilter.Contains(zz.Field<string>("Channel")));
// Once finished with filtering, do the ordering
query = query.OrderBy(zz => zz.Field<int>("ID"));
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.
I am looking to optimize my LINQ query because although it works right, the SQL it generates is convoluted and inefficient...
Basically, I am looking to select customers (as CustomerDisplay objects) who ordered the required product (reqdProdId), and are registered with a credit card number (stored as a row in RegisteredCustomer table with a foreign key CustId)
var q = from cust in db.Customers
join regCust in db.RegisteredCustomers on cust.ID equals regCust.CustId
where cust.CustomerProducts.Any(co => co.ProductID == reqdProdId)
where regCust.CreditCardNumber != null && regCust.Authorized == true
select new CustomerDisplay
{
Id = cust.Id,
Name = cust.Person.DisplayName,
RegNumber = cust.RegNumber
};
As an overview, a Customer has a corresponding Person which has the Name; PersonID is a foreign key in Customer table.
If I look at the SQL generated, I see all columns being selected from the Person table. Fyi, DisplayName is an extension method which uses Customer.FirstName and LastName. Any ideas how I can limit the columns from Person?
Secondly, I want to get rid of the Any clause (and use a sub-query) to select all other CustomerIds who have the required ProductID, because it (understandably) generates an Exists clause.
As you may know, LINQ has a known issue with junction tables, so I cannot just do a cust.CustomerProducts.Products.
How can I select all Customers in the junction table with the required ProductID?
Any help/advice is appreciated.
The first step is to start your query from CustomerProducts (as Alex Said):
IQueryable<CustomerDisplay> myCustDisplay =
from custProd in db.CustomerProducts
join regCust in db.RegisteredCustomers
on custProd.Customer.ID equals regCust.CustId
where
custProd.ProductID == reqProdId
&& regCust.CreditCardNumber != null
&& regCust.Authorized == true
select new CustomerDisplay
{
Id = cust.Id,
Name = cust.Person.Name,
RegNumber = cust.RegNumber
};
This will simplify your syntax and hopefully result in a better execution plan.
Next, you should consider creating a foreign key relationship between Customers and RegisteredCustomers. This would result in a query that looked like this:
IQueryable<CustomerDisplay> myCustDisplay =
from custProd in db.CustomerProducts
where
custProd.ProductID == reqProdId
&& custProd.Customer.RegisteredCustomer.CreditCardNumber != null
&& custProd.Customer.RegisteredCustomer.Authorized == true
select new CustomerDisplay
{
Id = cust.Id,
Name = cust.Person.Name,
RegNumber = cust.RegNumber
};
Finally, for optimum speed, have LINQ compile your query at compile time, rather than run time by using a compiled query:
Func<MyDataContext, SearchParameters, IQueryable<CustomerDisplay>>
GetCustWithProd =
System.Data.Linq.CompiledQuery.Compile(
(MyDataContext db, SearchParameters myParams) =>
from custProd in db.CustomerProducts
where
custProd.ProductID == myParams.reqProdId
&& custProd.Customer.RegisteredCustomer.CreditCardNumber != null
&& custProd.Customer.RegisteredCustomer.Authorized == true
select new CustomerDisplay
{
Id = cust.Id,
Name = cust.Person.Name,
RegNumber = cust.RegNumber
};
);
You can call the compiled query like this:
IQueryable<CustomerDisplay> myCustDisplay = GetCustWithProd(db, myParams);
I'd suggest starting your query from the product in question, e.g. something like:
from cp in db.CustomerProducts
join .....
where cp.ProductID == reqdProdID
As you have found, using a property defined as an extension function or in a partial class will require that the entire object is hydrated first and then the select projection is done on the client side because the server has no knowledge of these additional properties. Be glad that your code ran at all. If you were to use the non-mapped value elsewhere in your query (other than in the projection), you would likely see a run-time exception. You can see this if you try to use the Customer.Person.DisplayName property in a Where clause. As you have found, the fix is to do the string concatenation in the projection clause directly.
Lame Duck, I think there is a bug in your code as the cust variable used in your select clause isn't declared elsewhere as a source local variable (in the from clauses).
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. :)