var result=(from refridgerators in context.A
group refridgerators by new { refridgerators.Id, refridgerators.Name } into gr
select new DAO<String>
{
Key = gr.Key.Name,
Count = gr.Count()
}).OrderByDescending(k => k.Count).Take(numberOfRecords).ToList();
This is my linq to sql query this is working perfectly fine.
this shows top 5 records (sorted by their count) if i pass numberOfRecords =5.
now my problem is i don`t want to modify query. so what should i do in above query to show all records. This is in relation with my requirement i want to use same query to show all refridgerators and Top 5 , top 10 refridgerators.
I am not sure if it is possible using LINQ. but i guess there must be something related to this.
I would simply don't add the Take to the query but to the code where you consume this query.
So for example:
public static IEnumerable<DAO> GetRefrigerators()
{
var query = from refridgerators in context.A
group refridgerators by new { refridgerators.Id, refridgerators.Name } into gr
select new DAO<String>
{
Key = gr.Key.Name,
Count = gr.Count()
};
return query.OrderByDescending(k => k.Count);
}
Now you can either use:
var refrigerators = GetRefrigerators().Take(5).ToList();
or
var refrigerators = GetRefrigerators().Take(10).ToList();
or
var refrigerators = GetRefrigerators().ToList();
I'd make numberOfRecords a int? and if the value is null you should not call Take(numberOfRecords)
var result = (from refridgerators in context.A
group refridgerators by new { refridgerators.Id, refridgerators.Name } into gr
select new DAO<String>
{
Key = gr.Key.Name,
Count = gr.Count()
}).OrderByDescending(k => k.Count);
if(numberOfRecords.HasValue)
result = result.Take(numberOfRecords.Value);
return result.ToList();
I know it changes your query a little bit but I believe it is pretty acceptable, adding a numberOfRecords of a super high value adds an overheard to your query which isn't useful in your case.
So this post is very old, I know, but my solution is not provided (maybe someone wants to achieve the same after 2 years, like me):
You could create your own extension-method that also works with linq 2 sql. Example:
public static class LinqExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<TResult> TakeIfNotNull<TResult>(this IEnumerable<TResult> source, int? count)
{
return !count.HasValue ? source : source.Take(count.Value);
}
}
this takes an int? instead of int and returns either the source-enumerable if count is null else it returns the result of default Take-method.
So you could write like:
.OrderByDescending(k => k.Count).TakeIfNotNull(numberOfRecords).ToList();
if numberOfCounts is null, it'll take all records.
As the right solution has already been posted by Tim, still I want your attention to the simpler solution, if suits to your requirement.
Add one more if condition at the top of this query.
if(allRecordRequired)
{
numberOfRecords = 2000000;
}
Leave your query as it is.
Pass a huge number to your method.A number that is equal (at least) or bigger than the items count.That should give you all records.
I am trying to populate a ViewModel in an MVC app with data from a parent table joined with a child table. The only data I want from the child table is a comma diliminated string from the Nomenclature field of the top three records and put them into a string field in the ViewModel. Here is what I have tried without success:
public IEnumerable<ReqHeaderVM> GetOpenReqs(string siteCode)
{
var openReqs = from h in context.ReqHeaders
join l in context.ReqLineItems on h.ID equals l.ReqID into reqLineItems
select new ReqHeaderVM
{
ReqID = h.ID,
ShopCode = h.ShopCode
Nomenclatures = reqLineItems.Select(x => x.Nomenclature).Take(3) // This doesn't work
};
return (openReqs.ToList());
}
Here is the ViewMdel:
public class ReqHeaderVM
{
[Editable(false)]
public string ReqID { get; set; }
public string ShopCode { get; set; }
public string Nomenclatures {get; set;}
}
Assuming that you have proper relationship (foreign key) between ReqHeaders and ReqLineItems, this should give you what you are looking for...
public IEnumerable<ReqHeaderVM> GetOpenReqs(string siteCode)
{
var openReqs = from h in context.ReqHeaders
select new
{
ReqID = h.ID,
ShopCode = h.ShopCode
Nomenclatures = h.ReqLineItems
.OrderBy(x => x.SomeColumn)
.Select(x => x.Nomenclature)
.Take(3)
};
var openReqsTran = from oreq in openReqs.AsEnumerable()
select new ReqHeaderVM
{
oreq.ReqID,
oreq.ShopCode,
Nomenclatures = string.Join(", ", oreq.Nomenclatures)
};
return (openReqsTran);
}
Note that Nomenclatures is a list of type of Nomenclature.
Yes, the join creates a single Cartesian result set. (think tabular data) what you are attempting to do. To get the results you want you have a few choices.
use lazy loading and iterate over each header querying the line items individually.
pro - simple queries
con - select n+1
query all headers and all line items, but build view model with only the top 3
pro - single query
con - large Cartesian result set query too much data
query all headers and all associated lines individuals
pro - 2 smaller, simpler queries
con - query too many line details.
query all headers and top 3 lines per header in 2 queries
pro - get only the information you require
con - complex query for top 3 lines per header.
Using Linq commands and Linq To SQL datacontext, Im trying to instance an Entity called "Produccion" from my datacontext in this way:
Demo.View.Data.PRODUCCION pocoProduccion =
(
from m in db.MEDICOXPROMOTORs
join a in db.ATENCIONs on m.cmp equals a.cmp
join e in db.EXAMENXATENCIONs on a.numeroatencion equals e.numeroatencion
join c in db.CITAs on e.numerocita equals c.numerocita
where e.codigo == codigoExamenxAtencion
select new Demo.View.Data.PRODUCCION
{
cmp = a.cmp,
bonificacion = comi,
valorventa = precioEstudio,
codigoestudio = lblCodigoEstudio.Content.ToString(),
codigopaciente = Convert.ToInt32(lblCodigoPaciente.Content.ToString()),
codigoproduccion = Convert.ToInt32(lblNroInforme.Content.ToString()),
codigopromotor = m.codigopromotor,
fecha = Convert.ToDateTime(DateTime.Today.ToShortDateString()),
numeroinforme = Convert.ToInt32(lblNroInforme.Content.ToString()),
revisado = false,
codigozona = (c.codigozona.Value == null ? Convert.ToInt32(c.codigozona) : 0),
codigoclinica = Convert.ToInt32(c.codigoclinica),
codigoclase = e.codigoclase,
}
).FirstOrDefault();
While executing the above code, I'm getting the following error that the stack trace is included:
System.NotSupportedException was caught
Message="The explicit construction of the entity type 'Demo.View.Data.PRODUCCION' in a query is not allowed."
Source="System.Data.Linq"
StackTrace:
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitMemberInit(MemberInitExpression init)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitInner(Expression node)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.Visit(Expression node)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitSelect(Expression sequence, LambdaExpression selector)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitSequenceOperatorCall(MethodCallExpression mc)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitMethodCall(MethodCallExpression mc)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitInner(Expression node)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.Visit(Expression node)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitFirst(Expression sequence, LambdaExpression lambda, Boolean isFirst)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitSequenceOperatorCall(MethodCallExpression mc)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitMethodCall(MethodCallExpression mc)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.VisitInner(Expression node)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.QueryConverter.ConvertOuter(Expression node)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.SqlProvider.BuildQuery(Expression query, SqlNodeAnnotations annotations)
en System.Data.Linq.SqlClient.SqlProvider.System.Data.Linq.Provider.IProvider.Execute(Expression query)
en System.Data.Linq.DataQuery`1.System.Linq.IQueryProvider.Execute[S](Expression expression)
en System.Linq.Queryable.FirstOrDefault[TSource](IQueryable`1 source)
en Demo.View.InformeMedico.realizarProduccionInforme(Int32 codigoExamenxAtencion, Double precioEstudio, Int32 comi) en D:\cs_InformeMedico\app\InformeMedico.xaml.cs:línea 602
en Demo.View.InformeMedico.UpdateEstadoEstudio(Int32 codigo, Char state) en D:\cs_InformeMedico\app\InformeMedico.xaml.cs:línea 591
en Demo.View.InformeMedico.btnGuardar_Click(Object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) en D:\cs_InformeMedico\app\InformeMedico.xaml.cs:línea 683
InnerException:
Is that now allowed in LINQ2SQL?
Entities can be created outside of queries and inserted into the data store using a DataContext. You can then retrieve them using queries. However, you can't create entities as part of a query.
I am finding this limitation to be very annoying, and going against the common trend of not using SELECT * in queries.
Still with c# anonymous types there is a workaround, by fetching the objects into an anonymous type, and then copy it over into the correct type.
For example:
var q = from emp in employees where emp.ID !=0
select new {Name = emp.First + " " + emp.Last, EmployeeId = emp.ID }
var r = q.ToList();
List<User> users = new List<User>(r.Select(new User
{
Name = r.Name,
EmployeeId = r.EmployeeId
}));
And in the case when we deal with a single value (as in the situation described in the question) it is even easier, and we just need to copy directly the values:
var q = from emp in employees where emp.ID !=0
select new { Name = emp.First + " " + emp.Last, EmployeeId = emp.ID }
var r = q.FirstOrDefault();
User user = new User { Name = r.Name, EmployeeId = r.ID };
If the name of the properties match the database columns we can do it even simpler in the query, by doing select
var q = from emp in employees where emp.ID !=0
select new { emp.First, emp.Last, emp.ID }
One might go ahead and write a lambda expression that can copy automatically based on the property name, without needing to specify the values explictly.
Here's another workaround:
Make a class that derives from your LINQ to SQL class. I'm assuming that the L2S class that you want to return is Order:
internal class OrderView : Order { }
Now write the query this way:
var query = from o in db.Order
select new OrderView // instead of Order
{
OrderID = o.OrderID,
OrderDate = o.OrderDate,
// etc.
};
Cast the result back into Order, like this:
return query.Cast<Order>().ToList(); // or .FirstOrDefault()
(or use something more sensible, like BLToolkit / LINQ to DB)
Note: I haven't tested to see if tracking works or not; it works to retrieve data, which is what I needed.
I have found that if you do a .ToList() on the query before trying to contruct new objects it works
I just ran into the same issue.
I found a very easy solution.
var a = att as Attachment;
Func<Culture, AttachmentCulture> make =
c => new AttachmentCulture { Culture = c };
var culs = from c in dc.Cultures
let ac = c.AttachmentCultures.SingleOrDefault(
x => x.Attachment == a)
select ac == null ? make(c) : ac;
return culs;
I construct an anonymous type, use IEnumerable (which preserves deferred execution), and then re-consruct the datacontext object. Both Employee and Manager are datacontext objects:
var q = dc.Employees.Where(p => p.IsManager == 1)
.Select(p => new { Id = p.Id, Name = p.Name })
.AsEnumerable()
.Select(item => new Manager() { Id = item.Id, Name = item.Name });
Within the book "70-515 Web Applications Development with Microsoft .NET Framework 4 - Self paced training kit", page 638 has the following example to output results to a strongly typed object:
IEnumerable<User> users = from emp in employees where emp.ID !=0
select new User
{
Name = emp.First + " " + emp.Last,
EmployeeId = emp.ID
}
Mark Pecks advice appears to contradict this book - however, for me this example still displays the above error as well, leaving me somewhat confused. Is this linked to version differences? Any suggestions welcome.
I found another workaround for the problem that even lets you retain your result as IQueryale, so it doesn't actually execute the query until you want it to be executed (like it would with the ToList() method).
So linq doesn't allow you to create an entity as a part of query? You can shift that task to the database itself and create a function that will grab the data you want. After you import the function to your data context, you just need to set the result type to the one you want.
I found out about this when I had to write a piece of code that would produce a IQueryable<T> in which the items don't actually exist in the table containing T.
pbz posted a work around by creating a View class inherited from an entity class that you could be working with. I'm working with a dbml model of a table that has > 200 columns. When I try and return the whole table I get "Root Element missing" errors. I couldn't find anyone who wanted to deal with my particular issue so I was looking at rewriting my entire approach. Just creating a view class for the entitiy class worked in my case.
As pbz suggests : Create a view class that inherits from your entity class. For me this is tbCamp so :
internal class tbCampView : tbCamp
{
}
Then use the view class in your query :
using (var dc = ConnectionClass.Connect(Dev))
{
var camps = dc.tbCamps.Select(s => new tbCampView
{
active = s.active,
idCamp = s.idCamp,
campName = s.campName
});
SmartTableViewer(camps, dg1);
}
private void SmartTableViewer<T>(IEnumerable<T> allRecords)
{
// Build sorted rows back into new table
var table = new DataTable();
// Create columns based on type
if (allRecords is IEnumerable<tbCamp> tbCampRecords)
{
// Get the columns you want
table.Columns.Add("idCamp");
table.Columns.Add("campName");
foreach (var record in tbCampRecords)
{
// Make a new row
var r = table.NewRow();
// Add the contents to each column of the row
r["idCamp"] = record.idCamp;
r["campName"] = record.campName;
// Add the row to the table.
table.Rows.Add(r);
}
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("Unhandled type. Add support for new data type in SmartTableViewer()");
return;
}
// Update table in grid
dg1.DataSource = table.DefaultView;
}
Here is what happens when you try and create an entity class object in the query.
I didn't want to have to use an anonymous type if I could help it because I wanted the type to be tbCamp. Since tbCampView is of type tbCamp the is operator works well. see Brian Hasden's answer Passing a generic List<> in C#
I'm surprised this is even an issue but with larger tables I run into this error so I thought I would just show it here :
When trying to read this table into memory I get the following error. There are < 2000 rows but the columns are > 200 for each. I don't know if that is an issue or not.
If I just want a few columns I need to create a custom class and handle that which isn't that big of a pain. With the approach pbz provided I don't have to worry about it.
Here is the entire project in case it helps someone.
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
private const bool Dev = true;
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void btnGetAllCamps_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
using (var dc = ConnectionClass.Connect(Dev))
{
IQueryable<tbCampView> camps = dc.tbCamps.Select(s => new tbCampView
{
// Project columns as needed.
active = s.active,
idCamp = s.idCamp,
campName = s.campName
});
// pass in as a
SmartTableViewer(camps);
}
}
private void SmartTableViewer<T>(IEnumerable<T> allRecords)
{
// Build sorted rows back into new table
var table = new DataTable();
// Create columns based on type
if (allRecords is IEnumerable<tbCamp> tbCampRecords)
{
// Get the columns you want
table.Columns.Add("idCamp");
table.Columns.Add("campName");
foreach (var record in tbCampRecords)
{
//var newRecord = record;
// Make a new row
var r = table.NewRow();
// Add the contents to each column of the row
r["idCamp"] = record.idCamp;
r["campName"] = record.campName;
// Add the row to the table.
table.Rows.Add(r);
}
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("Unhandled type. Add support for new data type in SmartTableViewer()");
return;
}
// Update table in grid
dg1.DataSource = table.DefaultView;
}
internal class tbCampView : tbCamp
{
}
}
I am using entityframework. I had two records which are retrieved from table using 'id' which is a primary key. Now i want to compare these two table records data and display the old value and new value in my view. Now my question is how to compare two records... There are almost 20 properties in my table from which i retrieve the data. We have to compare each and every property or is there are any best method... Can any one please help me to find the solution..
public bool Equals<T>(T first, T second)
{
var f = new List<T>() {first};
var s = new List<T>() {second};
PropertyInfo[] propertyInfos = typeof(T).GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Static);
foreach (PropertyInfo propertyInfo in propertyInfos)
{
if (f.Select(x => propertyInfo.Name).FirstOrDefault() != s.Select(x => propertyInfo.Name).FirstOrDefault())
return false;
}
return true;
}
Changed to Equals < T > (T first, T second) as Kim R recommended
Try it :) I haven't tested it
I have a cluttery piece of code that I would like to shorten using Linq. It's about the part in the foreach() loop that performs an additional grouping on the result set and builds a nested Dictionary.
Is this possible using a shorter Linq syntax?
var q = from entity in this.Context.Entities
join text in this.Context.Texts on new { ObjectType = 1, ObjectId = entity.EntityId} equals new { ObjectType = text.ObjectType, ObjectId = text.ObjectId}
into texts
select new {entity, texts};
foreach (var result in q)
{
//Can this grouping be performed in the LINQ query above?
var grouped = from tx in result.texts
group tx by tx.Language
into langGroup
select new
{
langGroup.Key,
langGroup
};
//End grouping
var byLanguage = grouped.ToDictionary(x => x.Key, x => x.langGroup.ToDictionary(y => y.PropertyName, y => y.Text));
result.f.Apply(x => x.Texts = byLanguage);
}
return q.Select(x => x.entity);
Sideinfo:
What basically happens is that "texts" for every language and for every property for a certain objecttype (in this case hardcoded 1) are selected and grouped by language. A dictionary of dictionaries is created for every language and then for every property.
Entities have a property called Texts (the dictionary of dictionaries). Apply is a custom extension method which looks like this:
public static T Apply<T>(this T subject, Action<T> action)
{
action(subject);
return subject;
}
isn't this far simpler?
foreach(var entity in Context.Entities)
{
// Create the result dictionary.
entity.Texts = new Dictionary<Language,Dictionary<PropertyName,Text>>();
// loop through each text we want to classify
foreach(var text in Context.Texts.Where(t => t.ObjectType == 1
&& t.ObjectId == entity.ObjectId))
{
var language = text.Language;
var property = text.PropertyName;
// Create the sub-level dictionary, if required
if (!entity.Texts.ContainsKey(language))
entity.Texts[language] = new Dictionary<PropertyName,Text>();
entity.Texts[language][property] = text;
}
}
Sometimes good old foreach loops do the job much better.
Language, PropertyName and Text have no type in your code, so I named my types after the names...