I'm using a function :
fu_has_permissions(udt_person('johny','superman'),'fly_away')
udt_person is a user defined type :
create or replace TYPE udt_person AS OBJECT
(name VARCHAR2(3),
id VARCHAR2(18));
I want to use bind variables whan calling this function, but i'm not really sure what am i doing wrong ... Here's the code :
......
OracleParameter udtPersParam = new OracleParameter();
udtPersParam.ParameterName = ":pUdtPers";
udtPersParam.UdtTypeName = "UDT_PERS";
string[] paramValues = { name, id };
udtPersParam.Value = paramValues;
OracleParameter pAction = new OracleParameter(":pAction", OracleDbType.Varchar2, 255);
pAction.Value = action;
parameters.Add(udtPartParam);
parameters.Add(pAction);
try
{
_loginOdr = DBFacade.ExecuteSelectQuery("select fu_has_permissions(:pUdtPart, :pAction) from dual", parameters);
}
Thanks!
the udt type must be a class that implements
IOracleCustomType
and/or IOracleCustomTypeFactory, IOracleArrayTypeFactory
unfortuntately you cannot just create a string array and pass it in
look in the odp.net samples that come with the odp installation
%ora_home%\client_1\odp.net\samples\4\UDT
also check out these links for samples and walkthroughs
http://developergeeks.com/article/35/working-with-user-defined-type-oracle-udt-and-custom-type-using-odp-net-11g
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/database/ORACLE_UDT.aspx
and
http://st-curriculum.oracle.com/obe/db/hol08/dotnet/udt/udt_otn.htm
Don't know anything about ODP.Net really, but the error suggests that it doesn't like you trying to use a string array as the value for an Oracle parameter. Which doesn't sound unreasonable.
A quick google of 'odp.net object varchar2' gave this OTN forum post as the first result; it includes an example of using an object about half-way down, including converting to and from Oracle object types.
if I were you I'd have a look at the ODP add-in to Visual Studio. With this you can connect to your database, select a UDT on the database, and "Generate Custom Class" to get a .net class you can use.
Look inside the class and you'll see what Harrison means. Pay particular attention to the OracleObjectMappingAttributes on top of the properties, and the overrides of To/FromCustomObject.
When you construct your OracleCommand, the OracleParameter.Value needs to be a class of this type.
That should get you started at a high level. A word of warning, though. The code generated by ODP is ugly to say the least - we're on the point of ditching all ODP-generated classes in our own scenario. But you'll need to understand what things like IOracleCustomType, IOracleCustomTypeFactory, IOracleArrayTypeFactory, INullable are before you'll be in a position to do this.
Incidentally since your specific question surrounds arrays, you might want to look at Oracle NTYPEs here, rather than TYPEs.
Related
I've gone down a bit of a path and hit a wall with how this could be possibly achieved.
Basically, a query is constructed using JPA and passed to an Oracle DB. On the DB there is a Package, used to generate a reference, and this is dynamically named, based on the environment. This value is user-editable, and stored as a DB property within the application. I don't have any control over the architecture of this.
At a pre-JPA stage, a Query String is generated using the reference value for the Package, which is set as a property (again, I can't change the way this has been designed). I set this up using the Query method setParameter(), like so:
(pseudocode replacing the irrelevant parts for focused context)
String referenceRef = [ reference is fetched from DB properties ];
String queryString = "SELECT ?1 FROM sys.dual";
final Query myQuery = getEntityManager().createNativeQuery( queryString );
myQuery.setParameter( 1, referenceRef );
return myQuery.getSingleResult();
I pretty much did this as a reflex, only to realise (in retrospec, quite obviously) that this won't actually work, as it is escaping the element that should not be escaped...
So, where the referenceRef = "DynamicallyNamedPackage.DoThisDynamicallyNamedThing", the above code will just return "DynamicallyNamedPackage.DoThisDynamicallyNamedThing", as it is obviously making it safe, and the point of doing so is, to a certain extent, the antethesis of what I'm trying to do.
Is it possible to achieve this without creating a whole chunk of additional code? All I can currently think of, as an alternative, is to query dba_procedures for all package objects that match, and using the result of that query to construct the queryString (hence circumnavigating using any user-editable values), but it feels like it's going to be convoluted. This is the alternative, which I am using in lieu of an improvement:
final String verifyReference = "SELECT object_name FROM "
+ "dba_procedures WHERE object_type = 'PACKAGE' AND object_name =?1";
final Query refQuery = getEntityManager().createNativeQuery( verifyReference );
refQuery.setParameter( 1, referenceRef );
final String result = refQuery.getSingleResult();
final String queryString = "SELECT " + result + " FROM sys.dual";
final Query myQuery = getEntityManager().createNativeQuery( queryString );
return myQuery.getSingleResult();
It will essentially look up the user-editable property reference against a list of existing packages, then use the result of that query for building the original reference. It has more null checking and so on involved, and does remove the vulnerability, but feels a bit 'unpolished'.
(As has already been mentioned in the comments, this sort of is designed to need a SQL injection, but needs to prevent "SQL Injection" as a definition of not allowing the DB to be manipulated outside of the design by using an unintended value.)
The Oracle dictionary view all_procedures contains a list of all procedures accessible to the current user.
Specifically in the view there are columns OWNER, OBJECT_NAME (=package name), PROCEDURE_NAME.
You may use this view to sanitize the configured input by simple adding an EXISTS subquery such as:
select
?
from dual where exists (
select null from all_procedures
where
OWNER||'.'||OBJECT_NAME||'.'||PROCEDURE_NAME = upper(?) and
object_type = 'PACKAGE');
You will have to bind twice the same input parameter.
The query returns no data if there is not procedure with the given name, so you may raise an exception.
The query above expects a full qualified stored procedure name, i.e. owner.package.procedure, you'll have to adapt it slightly if you allow unqualified names (without the owner).
I have a stored proc that returns a list of users (rows in User table).
var admins = db.aspnet_UsersInRoles_GetUsersInRoles('/', "Admin");
LINQ generated aspnet_User classes for me, so can I somehow map the result to a List of aspnet_User type? Something like:
List<aspnet_User> admins = db.aspnet_UsersInRoles_GetUsersInRoles('/', "Admin");
Here is a capture of what is returned.
It's entirely possible that you just need:
List<aspnet_User> admins = db.aspnet_UsersInRoles_GetUsersInRoles('/', "Admin")
.ToList();
But it's hard to know without seeing what type the method call returns.
Perhaps this should be a comment but it is way too long...
Well, you do not really want the internal class <aspnet_User> you should want a MembershipUser.
So how about not using the stored procedure that comes with the membership provider but really use the Membership provider itsself.
There is a beautiful class: Roles in System.Web.Security
And it gives you this:
public static string[] GetUsersInRole(string roleName)
From here, a foreach to get the MembershipUser(s) in a list is not that complicated.
By default a stored procedure will return a type that it determines based on the output columns with Result tacked on to the end. It doesn't associate it with types you have already determined. To change this, you can either change the Return Type in the property window to the type you have already defined in your model, or when dragging the stored proc into your model, drop it directly on the type that you want the stored proc to be mapped into.
You don't get the opportunity to change the column mappings for stored procs however, so make sure the shape that the stored proc generates is the same as your target object structures.
It's an old post and I was working on it today and I get the same issue,
I think you are requesting asp membership ?
You can not convert this stored procedure to aspnet_User because it returns aspnet_UsersInRoles_GetUsersInRolesResult type.
but from this aspnet_UsersInRoles_GetUsersInRolesResult you can get userName, then request the aspnet_User table:
String app = "your application name";
String role = "your role name";
ArrayList userInRoleList = new ArrayList();
//Get the role ID
ASPNETDBDataContext aspDB = new ASPNETDBDataContext();
var userInRole = aspDB.aspnet_UsersInRoles_GetUsersInRoles(app, role);
foreach (aspnet_UsersInRoles_GetUsersInRolesResult users in userInRole)
{
userInRoleList.Add(users.UserName);
}
Why do I get the error:
Unable to create a constant value of type 'Closure type'. Only
primitive types (for instance Int32, String and Guid) are supported in
this context.
When I try to enumerate the following Linq query?
IEnumerable<string> searchList = GetSearchList();
using (HREntities entities = new HREntities())
{
var myList = from person in entities.vSearchPeople
where upperSearchList.All( (person.FirstName + person.LastName) .Contains).ToList();
}
Update:
If I try the following just to try to isolate the problem, I get the same error:
where upperSearchList.All(arg => arg == arg)
So it looks like the problem is with the All method, right? Any suggestions?
It looks like you're trying to do the equivalent of a "WHERE...IN" condition. Check out How to write 'WHERE IN' style queries using LINQ to Entities for an example of how to do that type of query with LINQ to Entities.
Also, I think the error message is particularly unhelpful in this case because .Contains is not followed by parentheses, which causes the compiler to recognize the whole predicate as a lambda expression.
I've spent the last 6 months battling this limitation with EF 3.5 and while I'm not the smartest person in the world, I'm pretty sure I have something useful to offer on this topic.
The SQL generated by growing a 50 mile high tree of "OR style" expressions will result in a poor query execution plan. I'm dealing with a few million rows and the impact is substantial.
There is a little hack I found to do a SQL 'in' that helps if you are just looking for a bunch of entities by id:
private IEnumerable<Entity1> getByIds(IEnumerable<int> ids)
{
string idList = string.Join(",", ids.ToList().ConvertAll<string>(id => id.ToString()).ToArray());
return dbContext.Entity1.Where("it.pkIDColumn IN {" + idList + "}");
}
where pkIDColumn is your primary key id column name of your Entity1 table.
BUT KEEP READING!
This is fine, but it requires that I already have the ids of what I need to find. Sometimes I just want my expressions to reach into other relations and what I do have is criteria for those connected relations.
If I had more time I would try to represent this visually, but I don't so just study this sentence a moment: Consider a schema with a Person, GovernmentId, and GovernmentIdType tables. Andrew Tappert (Person) has two id cards (GovernmentId), one from Oregon (GovernmentIdType) and one from Washington (GovernmentIdType).
Now generate an edmx from it.
Now imagine you want to find all the people having a certain ID value, say 1234567.
This can be accomplished with a single database hit with this:
dbContext context = new dbContext();
string idValue = "1234567";
Expression<Func<Person,bool>> expr =
person => person.GovernmentID.Any(gid => gid.gi_value.Contains(idValue));
IEnumerable<Person> people = context.Person.AsQueryable().Where(expr);
Do you see the subquery here? The generated sql will use 'joins' instead of sub-queries, but the effect is the same. These days SQL server optimizes subqueries into joins under the covers anyway, but anyway...
The key to this working is the .Any inside the expression.
I have found the cause of the error (I am using Framework 4.5). The problem is, that EF a complex type, that is passed in the "Contains"-parameter, can not translate into an SQL query. EF can use in a SQL query only simple types such as int, string...
this.GetAll().Where(p => !assignedFunctions.Contains(p))
GetAll provides a list of objects with a complex type (for example: "Function"). So therefore, I would try here to receive an instance of this complex type in my SQL query, which naturally can not work!
If I can extract from my list, parameters which are suited to my search, I can use:
var idList = assignedFunctions.Select(f => f.FunctionId);
this.GetAll().Where(p => !idList.Contains(p.FunktionId))
Now EF no longer has the complex type "Function" to work, but eg with a simple type (long). And that works fine!
I got this error message when my array object used in the .All function is null
After I initialized the array object, (upperSearchList in your case), the error is gone
The error message was misleading in this case
where upperSearchList.All(arg => person.someproperty.StartsWith(arg)))
I would like to populate a Treeview.
Here is what I have in DB :
table : Box
BoxID
BoxName
table Book :
BookID
BookName
BoxID (fk Box.BoxID)
table Chapter:
ChapterID
ChapterName
BookID (fk Book.BookID)
As you may know a treeview is made up of treenode object.
A treenode object have a text property and a tag property.
The "text" property is the text that it's display on the screen for this node and the "tag" is an "hidden" value (usually uses to identify a node)
So in my case; the fields ending with ID will be used in the "tag" property and the fields ending with Name will be used in the "text" property
example :
so for a book; I will use the BookID field for the "tag" property and BookName field for the "text" property
note : I use a dbml so I have a Book object, Box object and Chapter object and I use linq to get them from the db.
So my question is; what is the best practice to build this tree?
I have a solution but it's really ugly because it looks like I'm duplicating the code.
The problem is that the values I need to extract for the text and tag properties are identified by differents fields name in the db
So for the book level, I need to get the BookID field to populate the tag property of my node; for the box level, I need to get the BoxID field to populate the tag property , ....
How can I make a kind of generic way to do it ?
I hope I made myself clear enough, don't hesitate to ask me questions :)
Thx in advance
Here is what I have for the moment
I get the list of box with a linq (dbml) request.
List<Box> MyListofBox = getMyListofBox();
Treenode tnBox = null;
Treenode tnBook =null;
foreach(Box b in MyListofBox )
{
tnBox = new TreeNode();
tnBox.tag = b.BoxID;
tnBox.text = b.BoxName;
List<Book> MyListofBook = getMyListofBookByBoxID(b.BoxID)
foreach(Book boo in MyListofBook )
{
tnBook = new TreeNode();
tnBook.tag = boo.BookID;
tnBook.text = boo.BookName;
tnBox.nodes.add(tnBook);
}
mytreeview.nodes.add(tnBox);
}
but of course I don't like this solution...
do you have a better way ?
I would extract the you need from the database in the form of a struct, possibly via the anonnoumous type that has been added to C# together with linq. Then I would populate insert this data into the place in the tree.
From what I get, you are trying to get each property separately, which will not work so well, because then you will have to make a call to the database for each separate property, which is very wasteful.
Addition based on what you have added
I do not believe the code can be more compact - the names you call are similar, but not the same and the way you do it was what I was trying to explain earlier.
You could
Define an key/value interface that both Box and Book implement
Define a delegate that returns a TreeNode and create delegate methods that accept Box and Book
However, I think the code is fine as written. Sometimes you just have to code it and there's little point in further abstracting or optimizing it.
The only issue I see in the code is that you're making a database call in a loop. Whether or not that's a problem depends on the application.
I'm attempting to use LINQ to insert a record into a child table and I'm
receiving a "Specified cast is not valid" error that has something to do w/
the keys involved. The stack trace is:
Message: Specified cast is not valid.
Type: System.InvalidCastException
Source: System.Data.Linq TargetSite:
Boolean
TryCreateKeyFromValues(System.Object[],
V ByRef) HelpLink: null Stack: at
System.Data.Linq.IdentityManager.StandardIdentityManager.SingleKeyManager2.TryCreateKeyFromValues(Object[]
values, V& v) at
System.Data.Linq.IdentityManager.StandardIdentityManager.IdentityCache2.Find(Object[]
keyValues) at
System.Data.Linq.IdentityManager.StandardIdentityManager.Find(MetaType
type, Object[] keyValues) at
System.Data.Linq.CommonDataServices.GetCachedObject(MetaType
type, Object[] keyValues) at
System.Data.Linq.ChangeProcessor.GetOtherItem(MetaAssociation
assoc, Object instance) at
System.Data.Linq.ChangeProcessor.BuildEdgeMaps()
at
System.Data.Linq.ChangeProcessor.SubmitChanges(ConflictMode
failureMode) at
System.Data.Linq.DataContext.SubmitChanges(ConflictMode
failureMode) at
System.Data.Linq.DataContext.SubmitChanges()
(.....)
This error is being thrown on the following code:
ResponseDataContext db = new ResponseDataContext(m_ConnectionString);
CodebookVersion codebookVersion = db.CodebookVersions.Single(cv => cv.VersionTag == m_CodebookVersionTag);
ResponseCode rc = new ResponseCode()
{
SurveyQuestionName = "Q11",
Code = 3,
Description = "Yet another code"
};
codebookVersion.ResponseCodes.Add(rc);
db.SubmitChanges(); //exception gets thrown here
The tables in question have a FK relationship between the two of them.
The parent table's column is called 'id', is the PK, and is of type: INT NOT NULL IDENTITY
The child table's column is called 'responseCodeTableId' and is of type: INT NOT NULL.
codebookVersion (parent class) maps to table tblResponseCodeTable
responseCode (childClass) maps to table tblResponseCode
If I execute SQL directly, it works. e.g.
INSERT INTO tblResponseCode
(responseCodeTableId, surveyQuestionName, code, description)
VALUES (13683, 'Q11', 3, 'Yet another code')
Updates to the same class work properly. e.g.
codebookVersion.ResponseCodes[0].Description = "BlahBlahBlah";
db.SubmitChanges(); //no exception - change is committed to db
I've examined the variable, rc, after the .Add() operation and it does, indeed, receive the proper responseCodeTableId, just as I would expect since I'm adding it to that collection.
tblResponseCodeTable's full definition:
COLUMN_NAME TYPE_NAME
id int identity
responseCodeTableId int
surveyQuestionName nvarchar
code smallint
description nvarchar
dtCreate smalldatetime
dtCreate has a default value of GetDate().
The only other bit of useful information that I can think of is that no SQL
is ever tried against the database, so LINQ is blowing up before it ever
tries (hence the error not being a SqlException). I've profiled and verified
that no attempt is made to execute any statements on the database.
I've read around and seen the problem when you have a relationship to a non PK field, but that doesn't fit my case.
Can anyone shed any light on this situation for me? What incredibly obvious thing am I missing here?
Many thanks.
Paul Prewett
Post up the schema of the parent table.
if you look here, some other people have had your problem.
http://forums.microsoft.com/msdn/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=3493504&SiteID=1
It appears that Linq2SQL has trouble mapping some foreign keys to some primary keys. One guy had a resolution, but I think you are already mapping to an IDENTITY column.
Since the database isn't being called I think you have to look at the mappings linq to sql is using. What does the Association look like? There should be an Association on both the parent and child classes.
Take a look at the linq to sql Association between the two classes. The Association should have a ThisKey property. The cast that is failing is trying to cast the value of the property that ThisKey points to, I think.
As far as I can tell there can be a problem when there is more than one key and the type of the first key does not match the type that ThisKey points too. I'm not sure how linq would determine what the first key is.
From the looks of it you only have one key and one foreign key so that shouldn't be the problem, but the designer, if you are using it, has been known to get creative.
I'm pretty much guessing, but this looks like something I've seen before.
Is this an example of this bug? If so, try running your code in .NET 4.0 now that the beta is out.
If, like me, you aren't ready to start using the beta, you may be able to work around the problem. The issue seems to be that LINQ does not properly support relationships defined on non-primary key fields. However, the term "primary key" does not refer to the primary key defined on the SQL table, but the primary key defined in the LINQ designer.
If you dragged your tables into the designer, then Visual Studio automatically inspects the primary key defined in the database and marks the corresponding class field(s) as "primary keys". However, these do not need to correspond to each other. You can remove the key Visual Studio chose for you, and pick another field (or group of fields). Of course, you need to make sure this is logical (you should have a unique constraint in the database on the field/fields you choose).
So I had 2 tables/classes related to eachother using an alternative key. The parent table had 2 keys: a surrogate primary key defined as an int, and an alternative natural key defined as a string. In the LINQ designer, I had defined the association using the alternative key, and I experienced the InvalidCastException whenever trying to update that association field on the child object.
To work around this, I went into the LINQ designer, selected the int, and then changed the Primary Key property from True to False. Then I chose the string, and set it's Primary Key property to True. Recompiled, retested, and the InvalidCastException is gone.
Looking at your screen shot it looks like you may be able to fix your issue by changing the LINQ primary key on ResponseCode from ResponseCode.ID to ResponseCode.ResponseCodeTableID
ResponseCode rc = new ResponseCode()
{
SurveyQuestionName = "Q11",
Code = 3,
Description = "Yet another code"
};
and:
INSERT INTO tblResponseCode
(responseCodeTableId, surveyQuestionName, code, description)
VALUES (13683, 'Q11', 3, 'Yet another code')
Are not the same, you are not passing in the foreign key reference. Now, I'm huge n00b at LINQ2SQL, but I'd wager that LINQ2SQL is not smart enough to do that for you, and it expects it as the first parameter of the anonymous dictionary, and is trying to cast a string to an integer.
Just some ideas.
This block:
codebookVersion.ResponseCodes.Add(rc);
db.SubmitChanges(); //exception gets thrown here
Can you try InsertOnSubmit instead of Add? i.e.
codebookVersion.ResponseCodes.InsertOnSubmit(rc);
I think Add is not meant to be used to insert records if my memory serves me right. InsertOnSubmit is the one to use.
To try and narrow down the culprit.
Have you tried replacing the anonymous dictionary with something like:
ResponseCode rc = new ResponseCode();
rc.SurveyQuestName = "Q11";
rc.Code = 3;
rc.Description = "Yet Another Code";
I've yet to really work with .NET 3.5 yet (day job is still all 2.0), so I'm wondering if there is an issue with passing the data using the anonymous dictionary (The cases don't match the SQL Columns for one).
Yea, I've read that and other posts, but it always seems to involve someone linking up to a field that simply has a unique contraint. Or in this guy's case (which does sound exactly like mine), he didn't get a solution.
Here's the parent table:
tblResponseTable definition (which maps to CodebookVersion)
COLUMN_NAME TYPE_NAME
id int identity
versionTag nvarchar
responseVersionTag nvarchar
versionTag does have a unique contraint on it, but that's not represented anywhere that I can see in the LINQ-to-SQL stuff - and since nothing ever goes to the database... still stuck.
Mike, I hear you. But no matter where I look, everything looks correct. I've checked and rechecked that the ResponseTableId is an int and that Id is an int. They're defined as such in the designer and when I go look at the generated code, everything again appears to be in order.
I've examined the associations. Here they are:
[Table(Name="dbo.tblResponseCode")]
public partial class ResponseCode : ...
...
[Association(Name="CodebookVersion_tblResponseCode", Storage="_CodebookVersion", ThisKey="ResponseCodeTableId", OtherKey="Id", IsForeignKey=true)]
public CodebookVersion CodebookVersion
{
...
}
[Table(Name="dbo.tblResponseCodeTable")]
public partial class CodebookVersion : ...
...
[Association(Name="CodebookVersion_tblResponseCode", Storage="_ResponseCodes", ThisKey="Id", OtherKey="ResponseCodeTableId")]
public EntitySet<ResponseCode> ResponseCodes
{
...
}
And a screenshot of the association in case that will help:
Any further thoughts?
ResponseCode rc = new ResponseCode()
{
CodebookVersion = codebookVersion,
SurveyQuestionName = "Q11",
Code = 3,
Description = "Yet another code"
};
db.ResponseCodes.InsertOnSubmit(rc);
db.SubmitChanges();
You may want to check to see that any fields in your database tables which are set by the db server when inserting a new record have that reflected in the Linq to SQL diagram. If you select a field on the Linq to SQL diagram and view its properties you will see a field called "Auto Generated Value" which if set to true will ensure all new records take on the default value specified in the database.
LINQ to SQL has been deprecated, FYI - http://blogs.msdn.com/adonet/archive/2008/10/29/update-on-linq-to-sql-and-linq-to-entities-roadmap.aspx.
I ran into a very similar problem. I'll link you over to my wordy post: http://forums.asp.net/p/1223080/2763049.aspx
And I'll also offer a solution, just a guess...
ResponseDataContext db = new ResponseDataContext(m_ConnectionString);
CodebookVersion codebookVersion = db.CodebookVersions.Single(cv => cv.VersionTag == m_CodebookVersionTag);
ResponseCode rc = new ResponseCode()
{
ResponseCodeTableId = codebookVersion.Id,
SurveyQuestionName = "Q11",
Code = 3,
Description = "Yet another code"
};
db.ResponseCodes.InsertOnSubmit(rc);
db.SubmitChanges();
Somewhere in your object graph there is a conversion error, the underlying data model (or the Linq To SQL model) has changed. This is typically something like NVARCHAR(1) -> CHAR when it should be STRING, or something similar.
This error is not fun to hunt down, hopefully your object model is small.
We had a similar problem, caused by using non-integer keys. Details and hotfix number are here: https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=351358