Search Results

Search found 16050 results on 642 pages for 'linq to objects'.

Page 33/642 | < Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >

  • I need to convert the result of a stored procedure in a dbml file to IQueryable to view a list in an

    - by RJ
    I have a MVC project that has a Linq to SQL dbml class. It is a table called Clients that houses client information. I can easily get the information to display in a View using the code I followed in Nerd Dinner but I have added a stored procedure to the dbml and it's result set is of IQueryable, not IQueryable. I need to convert IQueryable to IQueryable so I can display it in the same View. The reason for the sproc is so I can pass a search string tothe sproc and return the same information as a full list but filtered on the search. I know I can use Linq to filter the whole list but I don't want the whole list so I am using the sproc. Here is the code in my ClientRepository with a comment where I need to convert. What code goes in the commented spot. public IQueryable<Client> SelectClientsBySearch(String search) { IQueryable<SelectClientsBySearchResult> spClientList = (from p in db.SelectClientsBySearch(search) select p).AsQueryable(); //what is the code to convert IQueryable<SelectClientsBySearchResult> to IQueryable<Client> return clientList; }

    Read the article

  • How do I do a table join on two fields in my second table?

    - by Cannonade
    I have two tables: Messages - Amongst other things, has a to_id and a from_id field. People - Has a corresponding person_id I am trying to figure out how to do the following in a single linq query: Give me all messages that have been sent to and from person x (idself). I had a couple of cracks at this. Not quite right MsgPeople = (from p in db.people join m in db.messages on p.person_id equals m.from_id where (m.from_id == idself || m.to_id == idself) orderby p.name descending select p).Distinct(); This almost works, except I think it misses one case: "people who have never received a message, just sent one to me" How this works in my head So what I really need is something like: join m in db.messages on (p.people_id equals m.from_id or p.people_id equals m.to_id) Gets me a subset of the people I am after It seems you can't do that. I have tried a few other options, like doing two joins: MsgPeople = (from p in db.people join m in AllMessages on p.person_id equals m.from_id join m2 in AllMessages on p.person_id equals m2.to_id where (m2.from_id == idself || m.to_id == idself) orderby p.name descending select p).Distinct(); but this gives me a subset of the results I need, I guess something to do with the order the joins are resolved. My understanding of LINQ (and perhaps even database theory) is embarrassingly superficial and I look forward to having some light shed on my problem.

    Read the article

  • LINQ to Twitter Queries with LINQPad

    - by Joe Mayo
    LINQPad is a popular utility for .NET developers who use LINQ a lot.  In addition to standard SQL queries, LINQPad also supports other types of LINQ providers, including LINQ to Twitter.  The following sections explain how to set up LINQPad for making queries with LINQ to Twitter. LINQPad comes in a couple versions and this example uses LINQPad4, which runs on the .NET Framework 4.0. 1. The first thing you'll need to do is set up a reference to the LinqToTwitter.dll. From the Query menu, select query properties. Click the Browse button and find the LinqToTwitter.dll binary. You should see something similar to the Query Properties window below. 2. While you have the query properties window open, add the namespace for the LINQ to Twitter types.  Click the Additional Namespace Imports tab and type in LinqToTwitter. The results are shown below: 3. The default query type, when you first start LINQPad, is C# Expression, but you'll need to change this to support multiple statements.  Change the Language dropdown, on the Main window, to C# Statements. 4. To query LINQ to Twitter, instantiate a TwitterContext, by typing the following into the LINQPad Query window: var ctx = new TwitterContext(); Note: If you're getting syntax errors, go back and make sure you did steps #2 and #3 properly. 5. Next, add a query, but don't materialize it, like this: var tweets = from tweet in ctx.Status where tweet.Type == StatusType.Public select new { tweet.Text, tweet.Geo, tweet.User }; 6. Next, you want the output to be displayed in the LINQPad grid, so do a Dump, like this: tweets.Dump(); The following image shows the final results:   That was an unauthenticated query, but you can also perform authenticated queries with LINQ to Twitter's support of OAuth.  Here's an example that uses the PinAuthorizer (type this into the LINQPad Query window): var auth = new PinAuthorizer { Credentials = new InMemoryCredentials { ConsumerKey = "", ConsumerSecret = "" }, UseCompression = true, GoToTwitterAuthorization = pageLink => Process.Start(pageLink), GetPin = () => { // this executes after user authorizes, which begins with the call to auth.Authorize() below. Console.WriteLine("\nAfter you authorize this application, Twitter will give you a 7-digit PIN Number.\n"); Console.Write("Enter the PIN number here: "); return Console.ReadLine(); } }; // start the authorization process (launches Twitter authorization page). auth.Authorize(); var ctx = new TwitterContext(auth, "https://api.twitter.com/1/", "https://search.twitter.com/"); var tweets = from tweet in ctx.Status where tweet.Type == StatusType.Public select new { tweet.Text, tweet.Geo, tweet.User }; tweets.Dump(); This code is very similar to what you'll find in the LINQ to Twitter downloadable source code solution, in the LinqToTwitterDemo project.  For obvious reasons, I changed the value assigned to ConsumerKey and ConsumerSecret, which you'll have to obtain by visiting http://dev.twitter.com and registering your application. One tip, you'll probably want to make this easier on yourself by creating your own DLL that encapsulates all of the OAuth logic and then call a method or property on you custom class that returns a fully functioning TwitterContext.  This will help avoid adding all this code every time you want to make a query. Now, you know how to set up LINQPad for LINQ to Twitter, perform unauthenticated queries, and perform queries with OAuth. Joe

    Read the article

  • Accessing Members of Containing Objects from Contained Objects.

    - by Bunkai.Satori
    If I have several levels of object containment (one object defines and instantiates another object which define and instantiate another object..), is it possible to get access to upper, containing - object variables and functions, please? Example: class CObjectOne { public: CObjectOne::CObjectOne() { Create(); }; void Create(); std::vector<ObjectTwo>vObejctsTwo; int nVariableOne; } bool CObjectOne::Create() { CObjectTwo ObjectTwo(this); vObjectsTwo.push_back(ObjectTwo); } class CObjectTwo { public: CObjectTwo::CObjectTwo(CObjectOne* pObject) { pObjectOne = pObject; Create(); }; void Create(); CObjectOne* GetObjectOne(){return pObjectOne;}; std::vector<CObjectTrhee>vObjectsTrhee; CObjectOne* pObjectOne; int nVariableTwo; } bool CObjectTwo::Create() { CObjectThree ObjectThree(this); vObjectsThree.push_back(ObjectThree); } class CObjectThree { public: CObjectThree::CObjectThree(CObjectTwo* pObject) { pObjectTwo = pObject; Create(); }; void Create(); CObjectTwo* GetObjectTwo(){return pObjectTwo;}; std::vector<CObjectsFour>vObjectsFour; CObjectTwo* pObjectTwo; int nVariableThree; } bool CObjectThree::Create() { CObjectFour ObjectFour(this); vObjectsFour.push_back(ObjectFour); } main() { CObjectOne myObject1; } Say, that from within CObjectThree I need to access nVariableOne in CObjectOne. I would like to do it as follows: int nValue = vObjectThree[index].GetObjectTwo()->GetObjectOne()->nVariable1; However, after compiling and running my application, I get Memory Access Violation error. What is wrong with the code above(it is example, and might contain spelling mistakes)? Do I have to create the objects dynamically instead of statically? Is there any other way how to achieve variables stored in containing objects from withing contained objects?

    Read the article

  • Finally! Entity Framework working in fully disconnected N-tier web app

    - by oazabir
    Entity Framework was supposed to solve the problem of Linq to SQL, which requires endless hacks to make it work in n-tier world. Not only did Entity Framework solve none of the L2S problems, but also it made it even more difficult to use and hack it for n-tier scenarios. It’s somehow half way between a fully disconnected ORM and a fully connected ORM like Linq to SQL. Some useful features of Linq to SQL are gone – like automatic deferred loading. If you try to do simple select with join, insert, update, delete in a disconnected architecture, you will realize not only you need to make fundamental changes from the top layer to the very bottom layer, but also endless hacks in basic CRUD operations. I will show you in this article how I have  added custom CRUD functions on top of EF’s ObjectContext to make it finally work well in a fully disconnected N-tier web application (my open source Web 2.0 AJAX portal – Dropthings) and how I have produced a 100% unit testable fully n-tier compliant data access layerfollowing the repository pattern. http://www.codeproject.com/KB/linq/ef.aspx In .NET 4.0, most of the problems are solved, but not all. So, you should read this article even if you are coding in .NET 4.0. Moreover, there’s enough insight here to help you troubleshoot EF related problems. You might think “Why bother using EF when Linq to SQL is doing good enough for me.” Linq to SQL is not going to get any innovation from Microsoft anymore. Entity Framework is the future of persistence layer in .NET framework. All the innovations are happening in EF world only, which is frustrating. There’s a big jump on EF 4.0. So, you should plan to migrate your L2S projects to EF soon.

    Read the article

  • Debugging XSLT with extension objects in Visual Studio 2010

    - by Alex Ciminian
    I'm currently working on a project that involves a lot of XSLT transformations and I really need a debugger (I have XSLTs that are 1000+ lines long and I didn't write them :-). The project is written in C# and makes use of extension objects: xslArg.AddExtensionObject("urn:<obj>", new <Obj>()); From my knowledge, in this situation Visual Studio is the only tool that can help me debug the transformations step-by-step. The static debugger is no use because of the extension objects (it throws an error when it reaches elements that reference their namespace). Fortunately, I've found this thread which gave me a starting point (at least I know it can be done). After searching MSDN, I found the criteria that makes stepping into the transform possible. They are listed here. In short: the XML and the XSLT must be loaded via a class that has the IXmlLineInfo interface (XmlReader & co.) the XML resolver used in the XSLTCompiledTransform constructor is file-based (XmlUriResolver should work). the stylesheet should be on the local machine or on the intranet (?) From what I can tell, I fit all these criteria, but it still doesn't work. The relevant code samples are posted below: // [...] xslTransform = new XslCompiledTransform(true); xslTransform.Load(XmlReader.Create(new StringReader(contents)), null, new BaseUriXmlResolver(xslLocalPath)); // [...] // I already had the xml loaded in an xmlDocument // so I have to convert to an XmlReader XmlTextReader r = new XmlTextReader(new StringReader(xmlDoc.OuterXml)); XsltArgumentList xslArg = new XsltArgumentList(); xslArg.AddExtensionObject("urn:[...]", new [...]()); xslTransform.Transform(r, xslArg, context.Response.Output); I really don't get what I'm doing wrong. I've checked the interfaces on both XmlReader objects and they implement the required one. Also, BaseUriXmlResolver inherits from XmlUriResolver and the stylesheet is stored locally. The screenshot below is what I get when stepping into the Transform function. First I can see the stylesheet code after stepping through the parameters (on template-match), I get this: If anyone has any idea why it doesn't work or has an alternative way of getting it to work I'd be much obliged :). Thanks, Alex

    Read the article

  • Solving Combinatory Problems with LINQ /.NET4

    - by slf
    I saw this article pop-up in my MSDN RSS feed, and after reading through it, and the sourced article here I began to wonder about the solution. The rules are simple: Find a number consisting of 9 digits in which each of the digits from 1 to 9 appears only once. This number must also satisfy these divisibility requirements: The number should be divisible by 9. If the rightmost digit is removed, the remaining number should be divisible by 8. If the rightmost digit of the new number is removed, the remaining number should be divisible by 7. And so on, until there's only one digit (which will necessarily be divisible by 1). This is his proposed monster LINQ query: // C# and LINQ solution to the numeric problem presented in: // http://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2009/12/07/intel-parallel-studio-great-for-serial-code-too-episode-1/ int[] oneToNine = new int[] { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 }; // the query var query = from i1 in oneToNine from i2 in oneToNine where i2 != i1 && (i1 * 10 + i2) % 2 == 0 from i3 in oneToNine where i3 != i2 && i3 != i1 && (i1 * 100 + i2 * 10 + i3) % 3 == 0 from i4 in oneToNine where i4 != i3 && i4 != i2 && i4 != i1 && (i1 * 1000 + i2 * 100 + i3 * 10 + i4) % 4 == 0 from i5 in oneToNine where i5 != i4 && i5 != i3 && i5 != i2 && i5 != i1 && (i1 * 10000 + i2 * 1000 + i3 * 100 + i4 * 10 + i5) % 5 == 0 from i6 in oneToNine where i6 != i5 && i6 != i4 && i6 != i3 && i6 != i2 && i6 != i1 && (i1 * 100000 + i2 * 10000 + i3 * 1000 + i4 * 100 + i5 * 10 + i6) % 6 == 0 from i7 in oneToNine where i7 != i6 && i7 != i5 && i7 != i4 && i7 != i3 && i7 != i2 && i7 != i1 && (i1 * 1000000 + i2 * 100000 + i3 * 10000 + i4 * 1000 + i5 * 100 + i6 * 10 + i7) % 7 == 0 from i8 in oneToNine where i8 != i7 && i8 != i6 && i8 != i5 && i8 != i4 && i8 != i3 && i8 != i2 && i8 != i1 && (i1 * 10000000 + i2 * 1000000 + i3 * 100000 + i4 * 10000 + i5 * 1000 + i6 * 100 + i7 * 10 + i8) % 8 == 0 from i9 in oneToNine where i9 != i8 && i9 != i7 && i9 != i6 && i9 != i5 && i9 != i4 && i9 != i3 && i9 != i2 && i9 != i1 let number = i1 * 100000000 + i2 * 10000000 + i3 * 1000000 + i4 * 100000 + i5 * 10000 + i6 * 1000 + i7 * 100 + i8 * 10 + i9 * 1 where number % 9 == 0 select number; // run it! foreach (int n in query) Console.WriteLine(n); Octavio states "Note that no attempt at all has been made to optimize the code", what I'd like to know is what if we DID attempt to optimize this code. Is this really the best this code can get? I'd like to know how we can do this best with .NET4, in particular doing as much in parallel as we possibly can. I'm not necessarily looking for an answer in pure LINQ, assume .NET4 in any form (managed c++, c#, etc all acceptable).

    Read the article

  • Get the first and second objects from a list using LINQ

    - by Vahid
    I have a list of Person objects. How can I get the first and second Person objects that meet a certain criteria from List<Person> People using LINQ? Let's say here is the list I've got. How can I get the first and second persons that are over 18 that is James and Jodie. public class Person { public string Name; public int age; } var People = new List<Person> { new Person {Name = "Jack", Age = 15}, new Person {Name = "James" , Age = 19}, new Person {Name = "John" , Age = 14}, new Person {Name = "Jodie" , Age = 21}, new Person {Name = "Jessie" , Age = 19} }

    Read the article

  • Help With LINQ: Mixed Joins and Specifying Default Values

    - by Corey O.
    I am trying to figure out how to do a mixed-join in LINQ with specific access to 2 LINQ objects. Here is an example of how the actual TSQL query might look: SELECT * FROM [User] AS [a] INNER JOIN [GroupUser] AS [b] ON [a].[UserID] = [b].[UserID] INNER JOIN [Group] AS [c] ON [b].[GroupID] = [c].[GroupID] LEFT JOIN [GroupEntries] AS [d] ON [a].[GroupID] = [d].[GroupID] WHERE [a].[UserID] = @UserID At the end, basically what I would like is an enumerable object full of GroupEntry objects. What am interested is the last two tables/objects in this query. I will be displaying Groups as a group header, and all of the Entries underneath their group heading. If there are no entries for a group, I still want to see that group as a header without any entries. Here's what I have so far: So from that I'd like to make a function: public void DisplayEntriesByUser(int user_id) { MyDataContext db = new MyDataContext(); IEnumberable<GroupEntries> entries = ( from user in db.Users where user.UserID == user_id join group_user in db.GroupUsers on user.UserID = group_user.UserID into a from join1 in a join group in db.Groups on join1.GroupID equals group.GroupID into b from join2 in b join entry in db.Entries.DefaultIfEmpty() on join2.GroupID equals entry.GroupID select entry ); Group last_group_id = 0; foreach(GroupEntry entry in entries) { if (last_group_id == 0 || entry.GroupID != last_group_id) { last_group_id = entry.GroupID; System.Console.WriteLine("---{0}---", entry.Group.GroupName.ToString().ToUpper()); } if (entry.EntryID) { System.Console.WriteLine(" {0}: {1}", entry.Title, entry.Text); } } } The example above does not work quite as expected. There are 2 problems that I have not been able to solve: I still seem to be getting an INNER JOIN instead of a LEFT JOIN on the last join. I am not getting any empty results, so groups without entries do not appear. I need to figure out a way so that I can fill in the default values for blank sets of entries. That is, if there is a group without an entry, I would like to have a mostly blank entry returned, except that I'd want the EntryID to be null or 0, the GroupID to be that of of the empty group that it represents, and I'd need a handle on the entry.Group object (i.e. it's parent, empty Group object). Any help on this would be greatly appreciated. Note: Table names and real-world representation were derived purely for this example, but their relations simplify what I'm trying to do.

    Read the article

  • Compiled query using list of class objects in C#

    - by Sukan
    Hello , Can somebody help me out in creating compiled queries where input is to be a list of class objects? I have seen examples where Func<DataContext, somematchobject, IQueryable<T>> is created and compiled. But can I do something like Func<List<T>, matchObject, T>, and compile it? Basically I want an object(T) meeting certain conditions (as in matchObject) to be returned from a list of objects(List<T>). Will CompiledQuery.Compile help me in this? Please help me experts!!

    Read the article

  • Why is it possible to enumerate a LinqToSql query after calling Dispose() on the DataContext?

    - by DanM
    I'm using the Repository Pattern with some LinqToSql objects. My repository objects all implement IDisposable, and the Dispose() method does only thing--calls Dispose() on the DataContext. Whenever I use a repository, I wrap it in a using person, like this: public IEnumerable<Person> SelectPersons() { using (var repository = _repositorySource.GetNew<Person>(dc => dc.Person)) { return repository.GetAll(); } } This method returns an IEnumerable<Person>, so if my understanding is correct, no querying of the database actually takes place until Enumerable<Person> is traversed (e.g., by converting it to a list or array or by using it in a foreach loop), as in this example: var persons = gateway.SelectPersons(); // Dispose() is fired here var personViewModels = ( from b in persons select new PersonViewModel { Id = b.Id, Name = b.Name, Age = b.Age, OrdersCount = b.Order.Count() }).ToList(); // executes queries In this example, Dispose() gets called immediately after setting persons, which is an IEnumerable<Person>, and that's the only time it gets called. So, a couple questions: How does this work? How can a disposed DataContext still query the database for results when I walk the IEnumerable<Person>? What does Dispose() actually do? I've heard that it is not necessary (e.g., see this question) to dispose of a DataContext, but my impression was that it's not a bad idea. Is there any reason not to dispose of it?

    Read the article

  • LINQDataSource - Query Multiple Tables?

    - by davemackey
    I have a database and I've created a DBML Linq-to-SQL file to represent this database. I've created a new aspx page and dropped a linqdatasource and a formview control onto it. When I configure the linqdatasource it gives me the choice only to select * from one table...but I want to pull from multiple tables. e.g. I have tables like simple_person, simple_address, simple_phone, and I want to pull from all of them. How can I accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • Group by and order by

    - by Simon Thompson
    using LINQ to NHibernate does anybody know how to use group by and order by in the same expression. I am having to execute the group by into a list and then order this, seem that I am missing soemthing here ??? Example:- Private function LoadStats(...) ... Dim StatRepos As DataAccess.StatsExtraction_vwRepository = New DataAccess.StatsExtraction_vwRepository return (From x In StatRepos.GetAnswers(Question, Questionnaire) _ Group x By xData = x.Data Into Count() _ Select New ChartData With {.TheData = xData, .TheValue = xData.Count} ).ToList.OrderBy(Function(x) x.TheData) End Sub

    Read the article

  • Select some records ...

    - by Kris-I
    I have an IList<MyList>. I'd like with LINQ keep the same list (same number of record) but I'd like reduce or/and rename some record. At the end I'd like to have IList<MyNewList>.

    Read the article

  • Friendly way to parse XDocument

    - by Oli
    I have a class that various different XML schemes are created from. I create the various dynamic XDocuments via one (Very long) statement using conditional operators for optional elements and attributes. I now need to convert the XDocuments back to the class but as they are coming from different schemes many elements and sub elements may be optional. The only way I know of doing this is to use a lot of if statements. This approach doesn't seem very LINQ and uses a great deal more code than when I create the XDocument so I wondered if there is a better way to do this? An example would be to get <?xml version="1.0"?> <root xmlns="somenamespace"> <object attribute1="This is Optional" attribute2="This is required"> <element1>Required</element1> <element1>Optional</element1> <List1> Optional List Of Elements </List1> <List2> Required List Of Elements </List2> </object> </root> Into public class Object() { public string Attribute1; public string Attribute2; public string Element1; public string Element2; public List<ListItem1> List1; public List<ListItem2> List2; } In a more LINQ friendly way than this: public bool ParseXDocument(string xml) { XNamespace xn = "somenamespace"; XDocument document = XDocument.Parse(xml); XElement elementRoot = description.Element(xn + "root"); if (elementRoot != null) { //Get Object Element XElement elementObject = elementRoot.Element(xn + "object"); if(elementObject != null) { if(elementObject.Attribute(xn + "attribute1") != null) { Attribute1 = elementObject.Attribute(xn + "attribute1"); } if(elementObject.Attribute(xn + "attribute2") != null) { Attribute2 = elementObject.Attribute(xn + "attribute2"); } else { //This is a required Attribute so return false return false; } //If, If/Elses get deeper and deeper for the next elements and lists etc.... } else { //Object is a required element so return false return false; } } else { //Root is a required element so return false return false; } return true; } Update: Just to clarify the ParseXDocument method is inside the "Object" class. Every time an xml document is received the Object class instance has some or all of it's values updated.

    Read the article

  • Manual (Dynamic) LINQ subquery using IN clause

    - by immortalali-msn-com
    Hi Everyone, I want to query the DB through LINQ writing manual SQL, my linq method is: var q = db.TableView.Where(sqlAfterWhere); returnValue = q.Count(); this method queries well if the value passed to variable "sqlAfterWhere" is: (this variable is String type) it.Name = 'xyz' but what if i want to use IN clause, using a sub query. (i need to use 'it' before every column name in the above query to work), i cant use 'it' before the sub query columns as its a separate query, so what should i do, if i dont use any thing, and use column names directly it gives error saying " could not be resolved" where is my column names with out 'it' at the begining. So the query not working is: (this is a string passed to the variable above): it.Name IN (SELECT Name FROM TableName WHERE Address LIKE '%SomeAddress%') the errors come out as: Name could not be resolved Address could not be resolved The exact error is: "'Name' could not be resolved in the current scope or context. Make sure that all referenced variables are in scope, that required schemas are loaded, and that namespaces are referenced correctly., near simple identifier, line 6, column 25." Same error for "Address as well if i use 'it.' before these columns it gives error as: "The element type 'Edm.Int32' and the CollectionType 'Transient.collection[Transient.rowtype(GroupID,Edm.Int32(Nullable=True,DefaultValue=))]' are not compatible. The IN expression only supports entity, primitive, and reference types. , near WHERE predicate, line 6, column 14." Thanks for the help

    Read the article

  • LINQ - IEnumerable.Join on Anonymous Result Set in VB.NET

    - by user337501
    I've long since built a way around this, but it still keeps bugging me... it doesnt help that my grasp of dynamic LINQ queries is still shakey. For the example: Parent has fields (ParentKey, ParentField) Child has fields (ChildKey, ParentKey, ChildField) Pet has fields (PetKey, ChildKey, PetField) Child has a foreign key reference to Parent on Child.ParentKey = Parent.ParentKey Pet has a foreign key reference to Child on Pet.Childkey = Child.ChildKey Simple enough eh? Lets say I have LINQ like this... Dim Q = FROM p in DataContext.Parent _ Join c In DataContext.Child On c.ParentKey = p.ParentKey Consider this a "base query" on which I will perform other filtering actions. Now I want to join the Pet table like this: Q = Q.Join(DataContext.Pet, _ Function(a) a.c.ChildKey, _ Function(p As Pet) p.ChildKey, _ Function(a, p As Pet) p.ChildKey = a.c.ChildKey) The above Join call doesnt work. I sort of understand why it doesnt work, but hopefully it'll show you how I tried to accomplish this task. After all this was done I would have appended a Select to finish the job. Any ideas on a better way to do this? I tried it with the PredicateBuilder with little success. I might not know how to use it right but it felt like it wasnt gonna handle the joining.

    Read the article

  • LINQ To SQL ignore unique constraint exception and continue

    - by Martin
    I have a single table in a database called Users Users ------ ID (PK, Identity) Username (Unique Index) I have setup a unique index on the Username table to prevent duplicates. I am then enumerating through a collection and creating a new user in the database for each item. What I want to do is just insert a new user and ignore the exception if the unique key constraint is violated (as it's clearly a duplicate record in that case). This is to avoid having to craft where not exists kind of queries. First off, is this going to be any more efficient or should my insert code be checking for duplicates instead? I'm drawn more to the database having that logic as this prevents any other type of client from inserting duplicate data. My other issue is related to LINQ To SQL. I have the following code: public class TestRepo { DatabaseDataContext database = new DatabaseDataContext(); public void Add(string username) { database.Users.InsertOnSubmit(new User() { Username = username }); } public void Save() { database.SubmitChanges(); } } And then I iterate over a collection and insert new users, ignoring any exceptions: TestRepo repo = new TestRepo(); foreach (var name in new string[] { "Tim", "Bob", "John" }) { try { repo.Add(name); repo.Save(); } catch { } } The first time this is run, great I have three users in the table. If I remove the second one and run this code again, nothing is inserted. I expected the first insert to fail with the exception, the second to succeed (as I just removed that item from the DB) and the third to then fail. What seems to be happening is that once the SqlException is thrown (even though the loop continues to iterate) all of the next inserts fail - even when there isn't a row in the table that would cause a unique violation. Can anyone explain this? P.S. The only workaround I could find was to instantiate the repo each time before the insert, then it worked exactly as excepted - indicating that it's something to do with the LINQ To SQL DataContext. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Linq-to-Sql IIS7 Login failed for user ‘DOMAIN\MACHINENAME$’

    - by cfdev9
    I am encountering unexpected behaviour using Linq-to-sql DataContext. When I run my application locally it works as expected however after deploying to a test server which runs IIS7, I get an error Login failed for user ‘DOMAIN\MACHINENAME$’ when attempting to open objects from the DataContext. This code explains the error, which breaks on the very last line with the error "System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: Login failed for user". var connStr ="Data Source=server;Initial Catalog=Test;User Id=testuser;Password=password"; //Test 1 var conn1 = new System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection(connStr); var cmdString = "SELECT COUNT(*) FROM Table1"; var cmd = new System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand(cmdString, conn1); conn1.Open(); var count1 = cmd.ExecuteScalar(); conn1.Close(); //Test 2 var conn2 = new System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection(connStr); var context = new TestDataContext(conn2); var count2 = context.Table1s.Count(); The connection string is not even using integrated security, so why is Linq-to-sql trying to connect as a specific user? If I change the server name in the connection string I get a different error so its using atleast part of the connection string, but apparently ignoring the UserId and Password. Very confused.

    Read the article

  • Linq-To-Objects group by

    - by Oskar Kjellin
    Hey, I'm building a software for timereporting I have a Dictionary<string, Dictionary<string, double>>. The key in the main dictionary is a users name and their value is a dictionary of . I have a function GetDepartment(string UserName) which returns a string with the users department. What I want is to crate a new dictionary, of the same type, that has the department as the main key and in the subdictionary a where hours is the total for that department. I have been trying to do this with linq but did not succeed. Would be very glad for some help here! EDIT: This code does exactly what I want. But I want it in LINQ Dictionary<string, Dictionary<string, double>> temphours = new Dictionary<string, Dictionary<string, double>>(); ; foreach (var user in hours) { string department = GetDepartment(user.Key); if (!temphours.ContainsKey(department)) { temphours.Add(department, new Dictionary<string, double>()); } foreach (var customerReport in user.Value) { if (!temphours[department].ContainsKey(customerReport.Key)) { temphours[department].Add(customerReport.Key, 0); } temphours[department][customerReport.Key] += customerReport.Value; } }

    Read the article

  • C# Linq List Contains Similar Elements

    - by John Peters
    Hi All, I am looking for linq query to see if there exists a similar object I have an object graph as follows Cart myCart = new Cart { List<CartProduct> myCartProduct = new List<CartProduct> { CartProduct cartProduct1 = new CartProduct { List<CartProductAttribute> a = new List<CartProductAttribute> { CartProductAttribute cpa1 = new CartProductAttribute{ title="red" }, CartProductAttribute cpa2 = new CartProductAttribute{ title="small" } } } CartProduct cartProduct2 = new CartProduct { List<CartProductAttribute> d = new List<CartProductAttribute> { CartProductAttribute cpa3 = new CartProductAttribute{ title="john" }, CartProductAttribute cpa4 = new CartProductAttribute{ title="mary" } } } } } I would like to get from the Cart = a CartProduct that has the exact same CartProductAttribute title values as a CartProduct that I need to compare. No more and no less. E.G. I need to find a similar CartProduct that has a CartProductAttribute with title="red" and a cartProductAttribute with title="small" in myCart (eg 'cartProduct1' in the example) CartProduct cartProductToCompare = new CartProduct { List<CartProductAttribute> cartProductToCompareAttributes = new List<CartProductAttribute> { CartProductAttribute cpa5 = new CartProductAttribute{ title="red" }, CartProductAttribute cpa6 = new CartProductAttribute{ title="small" } } } So from object graph myCart cartProduct1 cpa1 (title=red) cpa2 (title=small) cartProduct2 cpa3 (title=john) cpa4 (title=mary) Linq query looking for cartProductToCompare cpa5 (title=red) cpa6 (title=small) Should find cartProduct1 Hope all this makes sense... Thanks

    Read the article

  • Cannot update a single field using Linq to Sql

    - by KallDrexx
    I am having a hard time attempting to update a single field without having to retrieve the whole record prior to saving. For example, in my web application I have an in place editor for the Name and Description fields of an object. Once you edit either field, it sends the new field (with the object's ID value) to the web server. What I want is the webserver to take that value and ID and only update the one field. There are only two ways google tells me to do this: 1) When I get the value I want to change, the value and the ID, retrieve the record from the database, update the field in the c# object, and then send it back to the server. I don't like this method because not only does it include a completely unnecessary database read call (which includes two tables due to the way my schema is). 2) Set UpdateCheck for all the fields (but the primary keys) to UpdateCheck.Never. This doesn't work for me (I think) due to my mapping layer between the Linq to Sql and my Entity/ViewModel layer. When I convert my entity into the linq to sql db object it seems to be updating those fields regardless of the UpdateCheck setting. This might be just because of integers, since not setting an int means it is a zero (and no, I can't use int? instead). Are there any other options that I have?

    Read the article

  • SelectMany in Linq to entity

    - by Brazeta
    I was looking at some examples in microsoft site about linq and I see an example that I need to modify! http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vcsharp/aa336758.aspx#SelectManyCompoundfrom3 public void Linq16() { List customers = GetCustomerList(); var orders = from c in customers from o in c.Orders where o.OrderDate >= new DateTime(1998, 1, 1) select new { c.CustomerID, o.OrderID, o.OrderDate }; ObjectDumper.Write(orders); } Insted of having a select that retrives the CustomerID, OrderID and OrderDate I want to select the CustomerID and a System.Collection.Generic.List that contains all the orders for that user! Essentially I want to group my orders by CustomerID, but i noticed that linq to entity does not allow a .ToList(object) inside the select. I want something like this... List customers = GetCustomerList(); var orders = from c in customers from o in c.Orders where o.OrderDate >= new DateTime(1998, 1, 1) select new xpto { TheCostumerID = c.CustomerID, CostumerOrders = o.Select(i=>i.OrderID).ToList(), }; ...but the .ToList() is a big problem, at least for me. I'm trying to find out the solution for that but so far I have acomplished nothing! Please help me.

    Read the article

  • Help Converting T-SQL Query to LINQ Query

    - by campbelt
    I am new to LINQ, and so am struggle over some queries that I'm sure are pretty simple. In any case, I have been hiting my head against this for a while, but I'm stumped. Can anyone here help me convert this T-SQL query into a LINQ query? Once I see how it is done, I'm sure I'll have some question about the syntax: SELECT BlogTitle FROM Blogs b JOIN BlogComments bc ON b.BlogID = bc.BlogID WHERE b.Deleted = 0 AND b.Draft = 0 AND b.[Default] = 0 AND bc.Deleted = 0 GROUP BY BlogTitle ORDER BY MAX([bc].[Timestamp]) DESC Just to show that I have tried to solve this on my own, here is what I've come up with so far, though it doesn't compile, let alone work ... var iqueryable = from blog in db.Blogs join blogComment in db.BlogComments on blog.BlogID equals blogComment.BlogID where blog.Deleted == false && blog.Draft == false && blog.Default == false && blogComment.Deleted == false group blogComment by blog.BlogID into blogGroup orderby blogGroup.Max(blogComment => blogComment.Timestamp) select blogGroup;

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >