Trying to test the option of replacing our internal data access layer with Entity Framework 4 in our existing web application, I have started a new project and added an ADO.NET Entity Data model, then let it generate from the existing database.
It recognizes the tables in my database but it doesn't show any relationships between these tables, they are totally separated from each other. Is there any preconditions on the database so one can use the database first method?
DBMS is SQL Server 2005, PK and FK are defined in the database.
Thank you in advance
The foreign key constraints are part of the storage model. You can use the model browser window to view the constraints. This window is probably only available with Service Pack 1 of Visual Studio.
The Entity Framework uses a memory model and a conceptual model. These are stored in a. Edmx file. It is a common XML file that can be edited using any text editor. The foreign key constraint appears in elements like
<Association Name="FK_X_Y_NNNN">; ... </Association>
In the Model Editor foreign key references are indicated by lines between the entities. At the ends of the lines the cardinality is indicated.
If you see no foreign key constraints, then the database may not define them. Check your Database please.
Related
I have an ASP.NET Core application that uses EF6 for dealing with a third-party application's database.
Everything is working as expected, but I'm unable to insert rows into a joining table.
I have two tables, Users and Groups, and a joining table GroupUser that identifies which users are members of which groups. Users has a PK of UserId, and Groups has a PK of GroupId.
GroupUser has only 3 columns: GroupId, UserId and another column (which is irrelevant for this post). The two foreign keys in this table identify a unique record.
Every time I try to insert into GroupUser, I get the inner exception
The table/view does not have a primary key defined. The entity is read-only
The error is correct. There is no PK, but both of the FKs are marked as keys in the model. Shouldn't VS be able to use those as a PK somehow?
The inserts used to work as some point, but required some manual modification of the .edmx file as XML in order to work. Unfortunately, our version control records containing this modification have been lost (and I wasn't the one originally working on this).
I've looked at and tried about a dozen articles around this, but they generally have to do with views instead of tables, so don't seem applicable to my case. The ones that did seem applicable didn't solve the issue.
The only other clue I have for a solution is this comment I found in the code:
// Important note: If you have updated the edmx file in the [redacted]
// project and suddenly start having problems, the edmx file may need to be
// edited as an xml file so that you can make changes necessary to make
// VS believe that the GroupUser table has a primary key. See revision #[redacted]
I'm able to insert into User and Group tables just fine, and as I've said, I don't have access to the revision log mentioned.
Edit: The database is for a third-party application, and unfortunately, it's not as simple as just modifying the table to add a PK. I wish it was. Problem would be solved. But I've been advised by the vendor not to make this change, as it may have unexpected consequences, and would void our support.
How can I 'trick' EF into thinking the table has a key? I'm also open to other workarounds. Modifying the DB structure is currently out of the question.
I am using an Oracle database to generate my EF entities and context.
I do not have control over schema, its all provided by client, and I strictly can't change anything over there.
I have to generate entities for various Views.
When I do this, it is adding all non-nullable columns as the keys (as I can see while opening the edmx in XML editor).
How can I specify which columns should be used as keys? Can I do anything in at EF level without changing the schema?
Ok, I found the solution. We can do this in EF. Select each column in entity, and Set "Entity Key" to "True/ False".
I am using Database First EF to generate model from the existing database. When I first generated the models, it ignores only one of the table, the entity was not added to EDMX, no model file is created for the table and no context is created for the entity.
When I tried to explicitly add the table to EDMX (when generating the model, selected the specific table first and then updated the model with all the other tables from the database), it complained with the following error.
Two entities with possibly different keys are mapped to the same row. Ensure these two mapping fragments map both ends of the AssociationSet to the corresponding columns.
This specific table has two columns which are primary keys of some other tables and both the columns are specified as Primary keys for the table.
Am I doing something wrong or should I handle this table differently since it has two columns defined as Primary Keys? Any suggestions greatly appreciated!
You are not doing anything wrong. Your table is junction table for many-to-many relation. You don't need that table in the model because EF (in contrast to database) can handle many-to-many relation directly without any intermediate. The table is actually mapped on behind of the many-to-many relation - you will see that in mapping details window.
Btw. you are not using code first. Code first = no EDMX.
My MVC2 app use LINQ to SQL as the ORM. I just drag and drop the tables from the SQL Server Explorer connection to the LINQ design surface. Two of the tables (A and B) are related. Table A has 3 foreign keys referencing Table B. In the LINQ design surface, I manually change the name of the parent property for these associations to give them more distinguished names. However, whenever I modify the table structure in the SQL Server, and drag and drop the new structure to LINQ, I would lose the names. Is there a way to prevent this from happening? Thanks.
No. When you drag the tables back to the designer, Linq to SQL regenerates the code in the partial class, obliterating your custom changes.
The only way to preserve the name change is to rename the affected table fields in the database.
You might be able to achieve such customization preservation with the T4 Toolbox.
It is always a bad idea to make the associations at the LINQ level. Make the associations at the table level. This will ensure that when ever you are doing a drag and drop of the tables, the designer class reflects the correct associations.
Have been trying out the new Dynamic Data site create tool that shipped with .NET 3.5. The tool uses LINQ Datasources to get the data from the database using a .dmbl context file for a reference. I am interseted in customizing a data grid but I need to show data from more than one table. Does anyone know how to do this using the LINQ Datasource object?
If the tables are connected by a foreign key, you can easily reference both tables as they will be joined by linq automatically (you can see easily if you look in your dbml and there is an arrow connecting the tables) - if not, see if you can add one.
To do that, you can just use something like this:
<%# Bind("unit1.unit_name") %>
Where in the table, 'unit' has a foreign key that references another table and you pull that 'unit's property of 'unit_name'
I hope that makes sense.
(EDIT misunderstood the question, revising my answer to the following)
Your LinqDataSource could point to a view, which allows you to overcome the problem of not being able to express a Join in the actual element. From "How to: Create LINQ to SQL Classes Mapped to Tables and Views (O/R Designer)":
The O/R Designer is a simple object relational mapper because it supports only 1:1 mapping relationships. In other words, an entity class can have only a 1:1 mapping relationship with a database table or view. Complex mapping, such as mapping an entity class to multiple tables, is not supported. However, you can map an entity class to a view that joins multiple related tables.
You cannot put more than one object/datasource on a datagrid. You will have to build a single ConceptObject that combines the exposed properties of the part Entities. Try to use DB -> L2S Entities -> ConceptObject. You must be very contrived if the DB model matches the ConceptObject field-for-field.
You are best using a ObjectDataSource when you wnt to do more complex Linq and bind your Grid to the ObjectDataSource.
You do however need to watch out for Anonymous types that could give you some trouble, but anything is posible...