I have an OData service where I'm trying to filter by a list of IDs; the SQL equivalent would be something like:
SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE TableId IN (100, 200, 300, 400)
The property I'm trying to filter on is typed as an Int32. I've tried the following, which gives me an error "Operator 'add' incompatible with operand types 'Edm.String' and 'Edm.Int32'":
string ids = ",100,200,300,400,";
from m in provider.Media where ids.Contains("," + t.media_id + ",")
as well as
string ids = ",100,200,300,400,";
from m in provider.Media where ids.Contains("," + t.media_id.ToString() + ",")
and
string ids = ",100,200,300,400,";
from m in provider.Media where ids.Contains("," + Convert.ToString(t.media_id) + ",")
and
string ids = ",100,200,300,400,";
from m in provider.Media where ids.Contains(string.Concat(",", t.media_id, ","))
As you can see, currently I'm using LINQ to query the service.
Is there a way I can do what I'm trying to, or am I stuck constructing a text filter and using AddQueryOption, and iterating through the list and manually adding "or media_id eq 100" clauses?
With OData 4.01, in statement is supported like this:
http://host/service/Products?$filter=Name in ('Milk', 'Cheese')
See accepted answer, everything below is for OData v < 4.01
try this one
var ids = new [] { 100, 200, 300 } ;
var res = from m in provider.Media
from id in ids
where m.media_id == id
select m;
there is a comprehensive description on msdn on querying DataServices.
another approach would be
var results = provider.Media
.AddQueryOption("$filter", "media_id eq 100");
and since OData doesn't support IN statements you will come up with filter condition like this
.AddQueryOption("$filter", "(media_id eq 100) or (media_id eq 200 ) or ...");
which you can build using loop or linq Select and string.Join:
var ids = new [] { 100, 200, 300 };
var filter = string.Join(" or ", ids.Select(i=> $"(media_id eq {i})"));
var results = provider.Media.AddQueryOption("$filter", filter);
UPDATE: There is filter operation field=["a","b"] however it means something different.
UPDATE2: In OData V4 there is lambda expressions any and all, paired with array literal ["a", "b"] they might work as in but I was not able to come up with working example using v4 endpoint at OData.org
Expanding on vittore's answer (of which the second part is the correct answer), I've written something similar to the following for a demo project:
var filterParams = ids.Select(id => string.Format("(media_id eq {0})", id));
var filter = string.Join(" or ", filterParams);
var results = provider.Media.AddQueryOption("$filter", filter).Execute().ToList();
It's not elegant, and you wouldn't want to use this for a large list of ids (> ~60), but it'll do the trick.
Expanding on MCattle suggestion if we need more 50 or 60 ids then its advisable to do in 2 or more parallel calls and add them to concurrent dictionary or something similar as we get results from server. Though this increases the number of calls to server but because we are slowly moving to cloud environment it shouldn't be a big problem in my opinion.
Related
I need a Linq statement that will select all from a table where a field contains all elements in a list<String> while searching other fields for the entire string regardless of words.
It's basically just a inclusive word search on a field where all words need to be in the record and string search on other fields.
Ie I have a lookup screen that allows the user to search AccountID or Detail for the entire search string, or search clientID for words inclusive words, I'll expand this to the detail field if I can figure out the ClientId component.
The complexity is that the AccountId and Detail are being searched as well which Basically stops me from doing the foreach in the second example due to the "ors".
Example 1, this gives me an the following error when I do query.Count() afterwards:
query.Count(); 'query.Count()' threw an exception of type 'System.NotSupportedException' int {System.NotSupportedException}
+base {"Local sequence cannot be used in LINQ to SQL implementations of query operators except the Contains operator."} System.SystemException {System.NotSupportedException}
var StrList = searchStr.Split(' ').ToList();
query = query.Where(p => p.AccountID.Contains(searchStr) || StrList.All(x => p.clientID.Contains(x)) || p.Detail.Contains(searchStr));
Example 2, this gives me an any search word type result:
var StrList = searchStr.Split(' ').ToList();
foreach (var item in StrList)
query = query.Where(p => p.AccountID.Contains(searchStr) || p.clientID.Contains(item) || p.Detail.Contains(searchStr));
Update
I have a table with 3 fields, AccountID, ClientId, Details
Records
Id, AccountID, CLientId, Details
1, "123223", "bobo and co", "this client suxs"
2, "654355", "Jesses hair", "we like this client and stuff"
3, "456455", "Microsoft", "We love Mircosoft"
Search examples
searchStr = "232"
Returns Record 1;
searchStr = "bobo hair"
Returns no records
searchStr = "bobo and"
Returns Record 1
searchStr = "123 bobo and"
Returns returns nothing
The idea here is:
if the client enters a partial AccountId it returns stuff,
if the client wants to search for a ClientId they can type and cancel down clients by search terms, ie word list. due to the large number of clients the ClientID Will need to contain all words (in any order)
I know this seems strange but it's just a simple interface to find accounts in a powerful way.
I think there are 2 solutions to your problem.
One is to count the results in memory like this:
int count = query.ToList().Count();
The other one is to not use All in your query:
var query2 = query;
foreach (var item in StrList)
{
query2 = query2.Where(p => p.clientID.Contains(item));
}
var result = query2.Union(query.Where(p => p.AccountID.Contains(searchStr) || p.Detail.Contains(searchStr)));
The Union at the end acts like an OR between the 2 queries.
I am having trouble with the following piece of code. Before I paste it, Let me give a bit of history on what should happen.
I have a model containing 2 fields of interest at the moment, which is the name of the order the customer placed, and the date at which he/she placed it. A pre-calculated date will be used to query the dateplaced field (and should only query the dates , and not the time). The query counts the amount of duplicates that occur in the MondayOrder field, and groups them together. Now , when I exclude the where clause which should query the dates, the query runs great. However, The goal of this query is to count the amount of orders for the following week based on the date the order has been placed.
List<string> returnlist = new List<string>();
DateTime dt = getNextWeekMondaysDate().Date;
switch (day)
{
case DayOfWeek.Monday:
{
var CountOrders =
from x in Data.EntityDB.Orders
group x by x.MondayOrder into m
let count = m.Count()
select new
{
MondayOrderItem = m.Key, Amount = count
};
foreach (var item in CountOrders)
{
returnlist.Add(item.MondayOrderItem + " : " +
item.Amount);
}
}
break;
The getNextWeekMondaysDate() method has an overload which I can use, where if I supply it a date, it will get the following Monday's date from the parameter given. The problem is though, LINQ does not accept queries such as the following:
var CountOrders =
from x in Data.EntityDB.Orders
where getNextWeekMondaysDate(x.DatePlaced.Value).Date == dt
group x by x.MondayOrder into m
let count = m.Count()
select new { MondayOrderItem = m.Key, Amount = count };
This is exactly what I must achieve. Is there any workaround for this situation?
UPDATE
Here is the exception I get when I try the 2nd query.
LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'System.DateTime getNextWeekMondaysDate(System.DateTime)' method, and this method cannot be translated into a store expression.
You cannot do this directly, as user-defined method calls cannot be translated to SQL by the EF query provider. The provider recognizes a limited set of .NET methods that can be translated to SQL and also a number of canonical functions as well. Anything that cannot be expressed using these methods only is off-limits unless you write your own query provider (which is only theoretically an option).
As a practical workaround, you can calculate an appropriate range for x.DatePlaced.Value in code before the query and then use specific DateTime values on the where clause.
As an intellectual exercise, note that this method is recognized by the query provider and can be used as part of the expression. So this abomination should work too:
var CountOrders =
from x in Data.EntityDB.Orders
where EntityFunctions.AddDays(
x.DatePlaced.Date.Value,
(9 - DateAndTime.DatePart(DateInterval.WeekDay, x.DatePlaced.Value)) % 7)
.Date == dt
group x by x.MondayOrder into m
let count = m.Count()
select new { MondayOrderItem = m.Key, Amount = count };
Linq to Entities doesn't know how to convert arbitrary C# methods into SQL - it's not possible in general.
So, you have to work with the methods it does understand.
In this case, you could do something like this:
DateTime weekBegin = CalculateWeekBegin( dt );
DateTime weekEnd = CalculateWeekEnd( dt );
var CountOrders =
from x in Data.EntityDB.Orders
where x.DatePlaced.Value >= weekBegin && x.DatePlaced.Value < weekEnd
group x by x.MondayOrder into m
let count = m.Count()
select new { MondayOrderItem = m.Key, Amount = count });
I want to extract part of a collection to another collection.
I can easily do the same using a for loop, but my linq query is not working for the same.
I am a neophyte in Linq, so please help me correcting the query (if possible with explanation / beginners tutorial link)
Legacy way of doing :
Collection<string> testColl1 = new Collection<string> {"t1", "t2", "t3", "t4"};
Collection<string> testColl2 = new Collection<string>();
for (int i = 0; i < newLength; i++)
{
testColl2.Add(testColl1[i]);
}
Where testColl1 is the source & testColl2 is the desired truncated collection of count = newLength.
I have used the following linq queries, but none of them are working ...
var result = from t in testColl1 where t.Count() <= newLength select t;
var res = testColl1.Where(t => t.Count() <= newLength);
Use Enumerable.Take:
var testColl2 = testColl1.Take(newLength).ToList();
Note that there's a semantic difference between your for loop and the version using Take. The for loop will throw with IndexOutOfRangeException exception if there are less than newLength items in testColl1, whereas the Take version will silently ignore this fact and just return as many items up to newLength items.
The correct way is by using Take:
var result = testColl1.Take(newLength);
An equivalent way using Where is:
var result = testColl1.Where((i, item) => i < newLength);
These expressions will produce an IEnumerable, so you might also want to attach a .ToList() or .ToArray() at the end.
Both ways return one less item than your original implementation does because it is more natural (e.g. if newLength == 0 no items should be returned).
You could convert to for loop to something like this:
testColl1.Take(newLength)
Use Take:
var result = testColl1.Take(newLength);
This extension method returns the first N elements from the collection where N is the parameter you pass, in this case newLength.
I want to get a collection of Product entities where the product.Description property contains any of the words in a string array.
It would look something like this (result would be any product which had the word "mustard OR "pickles" OR "relish" in the Description text):
Dim products As List(Of ProductEntity) = New ProductRepository().AllProducts
Dim search As String() = {"mustard", "pickles", "relish"}
Dim result = From p In products _
Where p.Description.Contains(search) _
Select p
Return result.ToList
I already looked at this similar question but couldn't get it to work.
Since you want to see if search contains a word which is contained in the description of p you basically need to test for each value in search if it is contained in the description of p
result = from p in products
where search.Any(val => p.Description.Contains(val))
select p;
This is c# syntax for the lambda method since my vb is not that great
Dim result = From p in products _
Where search.Any(Function(s) p.Description.Contains(s))
Select p
You can use a simple LINQ query, if all you need is to check for substrings:
var q = words.Any(w => myText.Contains(w));
// returns true if myText == "This password1 is weak";
If you want to check for whole words, you can use a regular expression:
Matching against a regular expression that is the disjunction of all the words:
// you may need to call ToArray if you're not on .NET 4
var escapedWords = words.Select(w => #"\b" + Regex.Escape(w) + #"\b");
// the following line builds a regex similar to: (word1)|(word2)|(word3)
var pattern = new Regex("(" + string.Join(")|(", escapedWords) + ")");
var q = pattern.IsMatch(myText);
Splitting the string into words with a regular expression, and testing for membership on the words collection (this will get faster if you use make words into a HashSet instead of a List):
var pattern = new Regex(#"\W");
var q = pattern.Split(myText).Any(w => words.Contains(w));
In order to filter a collection of sentences according to this criterion all you have to do its put it into a function and call Where:
// Given:
// bool HasThoseWords(string sentence) { blah }
var q = sentences.Where(HasThoseWords);
Or put it in a lambda:
var q = sentences.Where(s => Regex.Split(myText, #"\W").Any(w => words.Contains(w)));
Ans From => How to check if any word in my List<string> contains in text by #R. Martinho Fernandes
In another posting: Does Linq-To-Sql support composable queries there was discussion on how to compose/concat where clauses dynamically. This appears to be done with an "AND" (i.e. the first where clause and the second where clause are joined by an AND). What I am wondering is if there is a way to compose Linq queries with an OR.
Example:
var people = from p in Person
where p.age < 18
select p
var otherPeople = from p in people
where p.firstName equals "Daniel"
select p
This gives people with a first name of "Daniel" and that are under 18. I'm looking for the syntax to join these to find people who have a first name of "Daniel" or are under 18.
Note: I am using ADO.net Data Services so I do not have .Contains() available to me.
EDIT: The Union Suggestion (by Garry Shutler) is exactly what I am looking for functionality-wise. I did run into two possible issues with it:
It looks like it would make multiple database hits if I was to do a third condition (union seems to take an IEnumerable as its parameter) - I was hoping to build up multiple AND and OR statements in code and then execute one request.
Union is not supported by ADO.Net Data Services (very disappointing)
Is what you want as simple as:
var people = from p in Person
where p.age < 18 || p.firstName == "Daniel"
select p;
or have you just given a simple example?
In which case you can use:
var under18 = from p in Person
where p.age < 18
select p;
var daniels = from p in Person
where p.firstName == "Daniel"
select p;
var combined = under18.Union(daniels);
LinqToSql may be intelligent enough to convert that to an OR but I'm not so sure.
What about using PredicateBuilder by Joe Albahari?
var predicate = PredicateBuilder.False<Person>();
predicate = predicate.Or(p => p.age < 18);
predicate = predicate.Or(p => p.firstName == "Daniel");
var query = Person.Where(predicate);
The predicate option is the way to go. The Union option DOES NOT build good sql. Reference http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums/en-US/linqprojectgeneral/thread/925b245d-5529-4a64-8cd4-4bc83ee6fe7a/
I wrote about how to achieve queries which search for a key value within a set on my blog .
Here are the relevant links.
Contains Operations in ADO.NET Data Services Part I
Contains Operations in ADO.NET Data Services Part II
Using this , you can write queries which look like this
//The set in which we have to search for a match
List<string> citiesIWillVisit = new List<string>() {"London","Berlin","Prague"};
var customersAround = nwContext.Customers
.IsIn<Customers>(citiesIWillVisit, c=> c.City);
foreach (Customers localCustomer in customersAround) {
System.Console.WriteLine(localCustomer.ContactName);
}