Is there a way to get the IQueryable object that the LinqDataSource has used to retrieve data? I thought that it might be possible from the selected event, but it doesn't appear to be.
Each row in my table has a category field, and I want to determine how many rows there are per category in the results.
I should also note that I'm using a DataPager, so not all of the rows are being returned. That's why I want to get the IQueryable, so that I can do something like
int count = query.Where(i => i.Category == "Category1").Count();
Use the QueryCreated event. QueryCreatedEventArgs has a Query property that contains the IQueryable.
The event is raised after the original LINQ query is created, and contains the query expression before to it is sent to the database, without the ordering and paging parameters.
There's no "Selected" event in IQueryable. Furthermore, if you're filtering your data on the server, there'd be no way you can access it, even if the API exposed it, but to answer a part of the question, let's say you have category -> product where each category has many products and you want the count of the products in each category. It'd be a simple LINQ query:
var query = GetListOfCategories();
var categoryCount = query.Select(c => c.Products).Count();
Again, depending on the type of object GetListOfCategories return, you might end up having correct value for all the entries, or just the ones that are loaded and are in memory, but that's the different between Linq-to-Objects (in memory) and Linq-to-other data sources (lazy loaded).
Related
I'm having a problem joining two LINQ queries.
Currently, my (original) code looks like this
s.AnimalTypes.Sort((x, y) => string.Compare(x.Type, y.Type));
What I'm needing to do is change this based on a date, then select all data past that date, so I have
s.AnimalTypes.Select(t=>t.DateChanged > dateIn).ToList()
s.AnimalTypes.Sort((…
This doesn't look right as it's not sorting the data selected, rather sorting everything in s.AnimalTypes.
Is there a way to concatenate the two LINQ lines? I've tried
s.AnimalTypes.Select(t=>t.DateChanged > dateIn).ToList().Sort((…
but this gives me an error on the Sort section.
Is there a simple way to do this? I've looked around and Grouo and OrderBy keep cropping up, but I'm not sure these are what I need here.
Thanks
From your description, I believe you want something like:
var results = s.AnimalTypes.Where(t => t.DateChanged > dateIn).OrderBy(t => t.Type);
You can call ToList() to convert to a List<T> at the end if required.
There are a couple of fundamental concepts I believe you are missing here -
First, unlike List<T>.Sort, the LINQ extension methods don't change the original collections, but rather return a new IEnumerable<T> with the filtered or sorted results. This means you always need to assign something to the return value (hence my var results = above).
Second, Select performs a mapping operation - transforming the data from one form to another. For example, you could use it to extract out the DateChanged (Select(t => t.DateChanged)), but this would give you an enumeration of dates, not the original animal types. In order to filter or restrict the list with a predicate (criteria), you'd use Where instead.
Finally, you can use OrderBy to reorder the resulting enumerable.
You are using Select when you actually want to use Where.
Select is a projection from one a collection of one type into another type - you won't increase or reduce the number of items in a collection using Select, but you can instead select each object's name or some other property.
Where is what you would use to filter a collection based on a boolean predicate.
My requirement is to get items, only from custom-columns, in a SharePoint list using LINQ.
Since my custom columns are created dynamically based on some calculations done on another SPList, it keeps increasing and decreasing in the count frequently, therefore I cannot use SPMetal.
I need to include a condition (!(SPBuiltInFieldId.Contains(field.Id))) to check if the items are taken only from custom fields in the following query.
List<SPListItem> AllResponses = (from SPListItem Response in oList.Items
select Response).ToList();
Please advice. Thanks!
I'm not sure it's possible to have a list item that contains only custom columns. Even if Title is not there, you'll have ID, Modified, Created, etc. Plus, there will be a number of hidden built-in columns.
If you want a list of items that contain items with custom fields, you can try something like the following, which utilizes Where and Any methods:
List<SPListItem> AllResponses =
(from SPListItem Response in oList.Items select Response)
.Where(item => item.Fields
.Cast<SPField>()
.Any(field => !SPBuiltInFieldId.Contains(field.Id)))
.ToList();
This will return all items that have at least one custom field.
I have an Infragistics Ultragrid that is being used to display a list of attributes. Sometimes the attribute is an array so I am adding a sub row for each element so the user can optionally expand the row showing the array attribute and see all the element values.
So for each element I use:
var addedRow = mGrid.DisplayLayout.Bands[1].AddNew();
which if I have 300 elements gets called 300 times and takes around 9 seconds (I have profiled the application and this call is taking 98% of the elapsed time)
Is there a way to add these sub rows more efficiently?
I know I'm late with an answer, but hopefully someone can use my answer anyway. Whenever I need to set rows and subrows for ultragrid, I simply set the datasource by using linq and anonymous types to generate the propper collection.
say you have a list of persons (id, Name), and a list of cars (id, CarName, and OwnerId (personId))
now you like to show a gridview showing all persons, with an expandabel subrow providing which cars they own. simply do the following.
List<Person> persons = GetAllPersons();
List<Car> cars = GetAllCars();
grid.DataSource = persons.Select(x => new {x.Id, x.Name, Cars = cars.Where(z => z.OwnerId == x.Id).ToList()}).ToList();
Note the anonymous type I make, this will generate a list of objects having an id, Name, and a collection of cars. Also note that I call the ToList method twice in the last line, this is necessary in order to get ultragrid to bind properly.
Note further more that if you need to edit the gridview, the above method migth not be sufficient, as the ultragrid needs an underlaying datasource for modifying, and I dont believe that this will cope. BUT on the internet you'll find some extensions that can copy a Linq collection into a DataTable, doing that and then you should also be able of editing the grid.
I have often used the above method and it performs extremely well, even for huge collections.
Hope this helps somebody
you might want to use ultraGrid1.BeginUpdate(); and ultraGrid1.EndUpdate(true); to stop screen from repainting. made huge performance benefit for my app.
Also in my case I was populating nearly >10,000 rows, so have used UltraDataSource
I have a simple LINQ EF query below using the method syntax. I'm using my Include statement to join four tables: Event and Doc are the two main tables, EventDoc is a many-to-many link table, and DocUsage is a lookup table.
My challenge is that I'd like to shape my results by only selecting specific columns from each of the four tables. But, the compiler is giving a compiler is giving me the following error:
'System.Data.Objects.DataClasses.EntityCollection does not contain a definition for "Doc' and no extension method 'Doc' accepting a first argument of type 'System.Data.Objects.DataClasses.EntityCollection' could be found.
I'm sure this is something easy but I'm not figuring it out. I haven't been able to find an example of someone using the multi-table include but also shaping the projection.
Thx,Mark
var qry= context.Event
.Include("EventDoc.Doc.DocUsage")
.Select(n => new
{
n.EventDate,
n.EventDoc.Doc.Filename, //<=COMPILER ERROR HERE
n.EventDoc.Doc.DocUsage.Usage
})
.ToList();
EventDoc ed;
Doc d = ed.Doc; //<=NO COMPILER ERROR SO I KNOW MY MODEL'S CORRECT
DocUsage du = d.DocUsage;
Very difficult to know what is going on without a screencap of your model, including the navigational properties on each entity.
But if your saying it's a many-to-many between Event and Doc (with EventDoc being the join table), and assuming your join table has nothing but the FK's and therefore doesn't need to be mapped, then shouldn't a single Event have many Doc's?
This query:
var query = ctx.Event.Include("EventDoc.Doc");
Would imply (based on the lack of pluralization): a single Event has a single EventDoc which has a single Doc.
But shouldn't that be: a single Event has a single EventDoc which has many Doc's.
Therefore your projection doesn't really make sense. Your trying to project to an anonymous type, with EventDate and Filename for a single Doc, but an Event has many Docs.
Maybe a projection like this would be more suitable:
var query = ctx.Event.Include("EventDoc.Docs.DocUsage")
.Select(x => new
{
EventDate = x.EventDate,
DocsForEvent = x.EventDocs.Docs
}).ToList();
And for that you work you need to fix up your model. Im surprised it even validates/compiles.
Either your model is wrong or your description of the database cardinalities in your question is. :)
Of course, i could be completely misunderstanding your database and/or model - so if i am let me know and i'll remove this answer.
I have a LINQ query mapped with the Entity Framework that looks something like this:
image = this.Context.ImageSet
.Where(n => n.ImageId == imageId)
.Where(n => n.Albums.IsPublic == true)
.Single();
This returns a single image object and works as intended.
However, this query returns all the properties of my Image table in the DB.
Under normal circumstances, this would be fine but these images contain a lot of binary data that takes a very long time to return.
Basically, in it current state my linq query is doing:
Select ImageId, Name, Data
From Images
...
But I need a query that does this instread:
Select ImageId, Name
From Images
...
Notice i want to load everything except the Data. (I can get this data on a second async pass)
Unfortunately, if using LINQ to SQL, there is no optimal solution.
You have 3 options:
You return the Entity, with Context tracking and all, in this case Image, with all fields
You choose your fields and return an anonymous type
You choose your fields and return a strongly typed custom class, but you lose tracking, if thats what you want.
I love LINQ to SQL, but thats the way it is.
My only solution for you would be to restructure your DataBase, and move all the large Data into a separate table, and link to it from the Image table.
This way when returning Image you'd only return a key in the new DataID field, and then you could access that heavier Data when and if you needed it.
cheers
This will create a new image with only those fields set. When you go back to get the Data for the images you select, I'd suggest going ahead and getting the full dataset instead of trying to merge it with the existing id/name data. The id/name fields are presumably small relative to the data and the code will be much simpler than trying to do the merge. Also, it may not be necessary to actually construct an Image object, using an anonymous type might suit your purposes just as well.
image = this.Context.ImageSet
.Where(n => n.ImageId == imageId)
.Where(n => n.Albums.IsPublic == true)
.Select( n => new Image { ImageId = n.ImageId, Name = n.Name }
.Single();
[If using Linq 2 SQL] Within the DBML designer, there is an option to make individual table columns delay-loaded. Set this to true for your large binary field. Then, that data is not loaded until it is actually used.
[Question for you all: Does anyone know if the entity frameworks support delayed loaded varbinary/varchar's in MSVS 2010? ]
Solution #2 (for entity framework or linq 2 sql):
Create a view of the table that includes only the primary key and the varchar(max)/varbinary(max). Map that into EF.
Within your Entity Framework designer, delete the varbinary(max)/varchar(max) property from the table definition (leaving it defined only in the view). This should exclude the field from read/write operations to that table, though you might verify that with the logger.
Generally you'll access the data through the table that excludes the data blob. When you need the blob, you load a row from the view. I'm not sure if you'll be able to write to the view, I'm not sure how you would do writes. You may be able to write to the view, or you may need to write a stored procedure, or you can bust out a DBML file for the one table.
You cannot do it with LINQ at least for now...
The best approach I know is create View for the table you need without large fields and use LINQ with that View.
Alternatively you could use the select new in the query expression...
var image =
(
from i in db.ImageSet
where i.ImageId == imageId && i.Albums.IsPublic
select new
{
ImageId = i.ImageId,
Name = i.Name
}
).Single()
The LINQ query expressions actually get converted to the Lambda expression at compile time, but I prefair using the query expression generally because i find it more readable and understandable.
Thanks :)