Search Results

Search found 5335 results on 214 pages for 'entity'.

Page 9/214 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • How to model my database when using entity framework 4?

    - by Junior Ewing
    Trying to wrap my head around the best approach in modelling a database when we are using Entity Framework 4 as the ORM layer. We are going to use asp.net mvc 2 for the application. Is it worth trying to model using the class diagram modeller that comes with Visual Studio 2010 where you graphically configure your models into the EDMX file and then generate out the database structure? I have run into a bunch of non trivial issues and for complex many to many mappings or multi primary key entities the answer is not that obvious even after poking around a while with the tools. I figure its easy at this point to give up and start modelling the DB using real, working DB modelling tools and then try to generate out the EDMX from the database, rather than trying to do the model first approach.

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework 4 - Handling very large (1000+ tables) data models?

    - by David Kreps
    We've got a database with over 1000+ tables and would like to consider using EF4 for our data access layer, but I'm concerned about the practical realities of using it for such a large data model. I've seen this question and read about the suggested solutions here and here. These may work, but appear to refer to the first version of the Entity Framework (and are more complex than I'd like). Does anyone know if these solutions have been improved upon in EF4? Or have other suggestions all together? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Obstacle Avoidance steering behavior: how can an entity avoid an obstacle while other forces are acting on the entity?

    - by Prog
    I'm trying to implement the Obstacle Avoidance steering behavior in my 2D game. Currently my approach is to apply a force on the entity, in the direction of the normal of the heading, scaled by a number that gets bigger the closer we are to the obstacle. This is supposed to push the entity to the side and avoid the obstacle that blocks it's way. However, in the same time that my entity tries to avoid an obstacle, it Seeks to a point more or less behind the obstacle (which is the reason it needs to avoid the obstacle in the first place). The Seek algorithm constantly applies a force on the entity that pushes it (more or less) in the direction of the obstacle, while the Obstacle Avoidance algorithm constantly applies a force that pushes the entity away (more accurately, to the side) of the obstacle. The result is that sometimes the entity succesfully avoids the obstacle, and sometimes it collides with it, depending on the strength of the avoidance force I'm applying. How can I make sure that a force will succeed in steering the entity in some direction, while other forces are currently acting on the entity? (And while still looking natural). I can't allow entities to collide with obstacles when realistically they should be able to easily avoid them, doesn't matter what they're currently doing. Also, the Obstacle Avoidance algorithm is made exactly for the case where another force is acting on the entity. Otherwise it wouldn't be moving and there would be no need to avoid anything. So maybe I'm missing something. Thanks

    Read the article

  • 2-Way databinding with Entity Framework and WPF DataGrid , is Possible ?

    - by Panindra
    i am working on POS application using SQL CE , WPF , Entity framework 3.5sp2 and iam trying to use data grid as my Order Entry Control for User to enter Products Order . Iam plannning to bind this to enitiy frmae work model , abd looking for 2 way updating ? private void button1_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { using (MasterEntities nwEntities = new MasterEntities()) { var users = from d in nwEntities.Companies select new { d.CompanyId, d.CompanyName, d.Place }; listBox1.DataContext = users; dataGrid1.DataContext = users; // foreach (String c in customers) // { // MessageBox.Show(c.ToString()); // } } } When try to double clikc on the datagrid it through s a error with Caption " Invalid Operation Execption was unhandled " and Message " A TwoWay or OneWayToSource binding cannot work on the read-only property 'CompanyId' of type '<f__AnonymousType0`3[System.Int32,System.String,System.String]'. whats wrong here and my xaml coding goes like this <Grid> <ListBox Name="listBox1" ItemsSource="{Binding}" /> <Button Content="Show " Name="button1" Click="button1_Click" /> <DataGrid AutoGenerateColumns="False" Name="dataGrid1" ItemsSource="{Binding}" > <DataGrid.Columns> <DataGridTextColumn Header=" ID" Binding="{Binding CompanyId}"/> <DataGridTextColumn Header="Company Name" Binding="{Binding CompanyName}"/> <DataGridTextColumn Header="Place" Binding="{Binding Place}" /> </DataGrid.Columns> </DataGrid> </Grid> EDITED : i made the changes shown by @vorrtex, But, then i added another button to save the chages and in button click event i added follwing code , butit showing Updating error private void button2_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { nwEntities.SaveChanges(); }

    Read the article

  • A question about entities, roles and interfaces in Entity Framework 4.

    - by mvole
    Hi, I am an experienced .NET developer but new to EF - so please bear with me. I will use an example of a college application to illustrate my problem. I have these user roles: Lecturer, Student, Administrator. In my code I envisage working with these entities as distinct classes so e.g. a Lecturer teaches a collection of Students. And work with 'is Student' 'TypeOf' etc. Each of these entities share lots of common properties/methods e.g. they can all log onto the system and do stuff related to their role. In EF designer I can create a base entity Person (or User...) and have Lecturer, Student and Administrator all inherit from that. The difficulty I have is that a Lecturer can be an Administrator - and in fact on occasion a Student can be a Lecturer. If I were to add other entities such as Employee and Warden then this gets even more of an issue. I could presumably work with Interfaces so a person could implement ILecturer and IStudent, however I do not see how this fits within EF. I would like to work within the EF designer if possible and I'm working model-first (coding in C#). So any help and advice/samples would be very welcome and much appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework LINQ Query using Custom C# Class Method - Once yes, once no - because executing on the client or in SQL?

    - by BrooklynDev
    I have two Entity Framework 4 Linq queries I wrote that make use of a custom class method, one works and one does not: The custom method is: public static DateTime GetLastReadToDate(string fbaUsername, Discussion discussion) { return (discussion.DiscussionUserReads.Where(dur => dur.User.aspnet_User.UserName == fbaUsername).FirstOrDefault() ?? new DiscussionUserRead { ReadToDate = DateTime.Now.AddYears(-99) }).ReadToDate; } The linq query that works calls a from after a from, the equivalent of SelectMany(): from g in oc.Users.Where(u => u.aspnet_User.UserName == fbaUsername).First().Groups from d in g.Discussions select new { UnReadPostCount = d.Posts.Where(p => p.CreatedDate > DiscussionRepository.GetLastReadToDate(fbaUsername, p.Discussion)).Count() }; The query that does not work is more like a regular select: from d in oc.Discussions where d.Group.Name == "Student" select new { UnReadPostCount = d.Posts.Where(p => p.CreatedDate > DiscussionRepository.GetLastReadToDate(fbaUsername, p.Discussion)).Count(), }; The error I get is: LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'System.DateTime GetLastReadToDate(System.String, Discussion)' method, and this method cannot be translated into a store expression. My question is, why am I able to use my custom GetLastReadToDate() method in the first query and not the second? I suppose this has something to do with what gets executed on the db server and what gets executed on the client? These queries seem to use the GetLastReadToDate() method so similarly though, I'm wondering why would work for the first and not the second, and most importantly if there's a way to factor common query syntax like what's in the GetLastReadToDate() method into a separate location to be reused in several different places LINQ queries. Please note all these queries are sharing the same object context.

    Read the article

  • Entity Relationship Diagram - Relationship Strength?

    - by 01010011
    Hi, I am trying to figure out under what circumstances I should use weak (non-identifying) relationships (where the primary key of the related entity does not contain a primary key component of the parent entity), verses when I should use strong (identifying) relationships (primary key of the related entity contains a primary key component of the parent entity). For example, when designing an Entity Relationship Diagram , if I have two entities, (e.g. book and purchaser), how do I know when to choose the solid Crows Foot or the dashed Crows Foot to connect the two entities? Any assistance will be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework mant to many insert

    - by Jacob
    I've been playing around with Entity Framework v2 and added some code to insert new entity with many to many relationship , lets say this entity is called meeting. I add hours to meeting : meeting.Hours.Add(hour); and I get different errors on different occasions On Update : Cannot insert the value NULL into column 'Meetings_Id', table 'Plan.dbo.MeetingHour'; column does not allow nulls. INSERT fails. The statement has been terminated. On Inset : An item with the same key has already been added. But the tricky party is that if I add this manually trough SQL Server Management Studio , I can update the entity with the same value , clearing it first (meeting.Hour.Clear()) Can't see what could be the problem , maybe entity model isn't mapped correctly ?

    Read the article

  • flex/actionscript client entity state refresh on JPA update using Pimento EntityManager

    - by Chris
    My Flex application uses a client-side pimento EntityManager which fetches quite a few objects and associations. It does this by forcing eager fetching of particular association ends in the form of fetch plans. I would like to update the client whenever a change has been made to an entity existing in the EntityManager's cache. Is it possible to update the state of the changed entity ONLY, including updating which entities are associated, without resetting the state of these associated entities? I have setup an EntityListener with a JPA post-update method that notifies clients when a persisted entity has been updated. I want this to trigger a refresh for the modified client-side entity, but calling EntityManager.refresh(entity) resets all lazy associations to proxies. Initializing these proxies resets the associated entities, even if they were loaded previously. I'm looking for an efficient way to keep the client's state in synch with the server's state, at least with respect to the entities that have already been retrieved by the initial load.

    Read the article

  • EF 4.1 Code First Detaching Entity

    - by Nazaf
    I am trying to add an entity to the DB. Once I have added it, I want to detach it, so I can manipulate the object safely without making any changes to the DB. After calling context.SaveChanges() I do the following to detach the entity: // save context.Stories.Add(story); // attach tags. They already exists in the database foreach(var tag in story.Tags) context.Entry(tag).State = System.Data.EntityState.Unchanged; context.SaveChanges(); context.Entry(story).State = System.Data.EntityState.Detached; However, changing the entity state to DETACHED will remove all related entities associated with the my entity. Is there a way to stop this ? If I don't detach the entity, all my changes are sent to the DB next time I call context.SaveChanges() Thanks!!

    Read the article

  • Slides and links for Entity Framework 4 and Azure from Devweek 2010

    - by Eric Nelson
    Last week (March 2010) I presented on Entity Framework 4 and the Windows Azure Platform at www.devweek.com. As usual, it was a great conference and I caught up with lots of old friends and made some new ones along the way. Entity Framework 4 Entity Framework 4 In Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 View more presentations from Eric Nelson. Windows Azure and SQL Azure Building An Application For Windows Azure And Sql Azure View more presentations from Eric Nelson. Entity Framework 4 Related Links Poll on Entity Framework 4 – one year on 101 EF4 Resources Recent resources on Entity Framework 4 Installing all the bits to demo Entity Framework 4 on the Visual Studio 2010 Release Candidate Azure Related Links UK Azure Online Community – join today. UK Windows Azure Site Start working with Windows Azure TCO and ROI calculator for Windows Azure

    Read the article

  • Complex Entity Framework linked-graphs issue: how to limit change set / break the graph?

    - by Hightechrider
    I have an EDMX containing Sentences, and Words, say and a Sentence contains three Words, say. Appropriate FK relationships exist between the tables. I create some words: Word word1 = new Word(); Word word2 = ... I build a Sentence: Sentence x = new Sentence (word1, word2, word3); I build another Sentence: Sentence y = new Sentence (word1, word4, word5); I try to save x to the database, but EF builds a change set that includes everything, including y, word4 and word5 that aren't ready to save to the database. When SaveChanges() happens it throws an exception: Unable to determine the principal end of the ... relationship. Multiple added entities may have the same primary key. I think it does this because Word has an EntityCollection<Sentence> on it from the FK relationship between the two tables, and thus Sentence y is inextricably linked to Sentence x through word1. So I remove the Navigation Property Sentences from Word and try again. It still tries to put the entire graph into the change set. What suggestions do the Entity Framework experts have for ways to break this connection. Essentially what I want is a one-way mapping from Sentence to Word; I don't want an EntityCollection<Sentence> on Word and I don't want the object graph to get intertwined like this. Code sample: This puts two sentences into the database because Verb1 links them and EF explores the entire graph of existing objects and added objects when you do Add/SaveChanges. Word subject1 = new Word(){ Text = "Subject1"}; Word subject2 = new Word(){ Text = "Subject2"}; Word verb1 = new Word(){ Text = "Verb11"}; Word object1 = new Word(){ Text = "Object1"}; Word object2 = new Word(){ Text = "Object2"}; Sentence s1 = new Sentence(){Subject = subject1, Verb=verb1, Object=object1}; Sentence s2 = new Sentence(){Subject=subject2, Verb=verb1, Object=object2}; context.AddToSentences(s1); context.SaveChanges(); foreach (var s in context.Sentences) { Console.WriteLine(s.Subject + " " + s.Verb + " " + s.Object); }

    Read the article

  • How far should an entity take care of its properties values by itself?

    - by Kharlos Dominguez
    Let's consider the following example of a class, which is an entity that I'm using through Entity Framework. - InvoiceHeader - BilledAmount (property, decimal) - PaidAmount (property, decimal) - Balance (property, decimal) I'm trying to find the best approach to keep Balance updated, based on the values of the two other properties (BilledAmount and PaidAmount). I'm torn between two practices here: Updating the balance amount every time BilledAmount and PaidAmount are updated (through their setters) Having a UpdateBalance() method that the callers would run on the object when appropriate. I am aware that I can just calculate the Balance in its getter. However, it isn't really possible because this is an entity field that needs to be saved back to the database, where it has an actual column, and where the calculated amount should be persisted to. My other worry about the automatically updating approach is that the calculated values might be a little bit different from what was originally saved to the database, due to rounding values (an older version of the software, was using floats, but now decimals). So, loading, let's say 2000 entities from the database could change their status and make the ORM believe that they have changed and be persisted back to the database the next time the SaveChanges() method is called on the context. It would trigger a mass of updates that I am not really interested in, or could cause problems, if the calculation methods changed (the entities fetched would lose their old values to be replaced by freshly recalculated ones, simply by being loaded). Then, let's take the example even further. Each invoice has some related invoice details, which also have BilledAmount, PaidAmount and Balance (I'm simplifying my actual business case for the sake of the example, so let's assume the customer can pay each item of the invoice separately rather than as a whole). If we consider the entity should take care of itself, any change of the child details should cause the Invoice totals to change as well. In a fully automated approach, a simple implementation would be looping through each detail of the invoice to recalculate the header totals, every time one the property changes. It probably would be fine for just a record, but if a lot of entities were fetched at once, it could create a significant overhead, as it would perform this process every time a new invoice detail record is fetched. Possibly worse, if the details are not already loaded, it could cause the ORM to lazy-load them, just to recalculate the balances. So far, I went with the Update() method-way, mainly for the reasons I explained above, but I wonder if it was right. I'm noticing I have to keep calling these methods quite often and at different places in my code and it is potential source of bugs. It also has a detrimental effect on data-binding because when the properties of the detail or header changes, the other properties are left out of date and the method has no way to be called. What is the recommended approach in this case?

    Read the article

  • Extend base type and automatically update audit information on Entity

    - by Nix
    I have an entity model that has audit information on every table (50+ tables) CreateDate CreateUser UpdateDate UpdateUser Currently we are programatically updating audit information. Ex: if(changed){ entity.UpdatedOn = DateTime.Now; entity.UpdatedBy = Environment.UserName; context.SaveChanges(); } But I am looking for a more automated solution. During save changes, if an entity is created/updated I would like to automatically update these fields before sending them to the database for storage. Any suggestion on how i could do this? I would prefer to not do any reflection, so using a text template is not out of the question. A solution has been proposed to override SaveChanges and do it there, but in order to achieve this i would either have to use reflection (in which I don't want to do ) or derive a base class. Assuming i go down this route how would I achieve this? For example EXAMPLE_DB_TABLE CODE NAME --Audit Tables CREATE_DATE CREATE_USER UPDATE_DATE UPDATE_USER And if i create a base class public abstract class IUpdatable{ public virtual DateTime CreateDate {set;} public virtual string CreateUser { set;} public virtual DateTime UpdateDate { set;} public virtual string UpdateUser { set;} } The end goal is to be able to do something like... public overrride void SaveChanges(){ //Go through state manager and update audit infromation //FOREACH changed entity in state manager if(entity is IUpdatable){ //If state is created... update create audit. //if state is updated... update update audit } } But I am not sure how I go about generating the code that would extend the interface.

    Read the article

  • Inner join and outer join options in Entity Framework 4.0

    - by bigb
    I am using EF 4.0 and I need to implement query with one inner join and with N outer joins I started to implement this using different approaches but get into trouble at some point. Here is two examples how I started of doing this using ObjectQuery<'T' and Linq to Entity 1)Using ObjectQuery<'T' I implement flexible outer join but I don't know how to perform inner join with entity Rules in that case (by default Include("Rules") doing outer join, but i need to inner join by Id). public static IEnumerable<Race> GetRace(List<string> includes, DateTime date) { IRepository repository = new Repository(new BEntities()); ObjectQuery<Race> result = (ObjectQuery<Race>)repository.AsQueryable<Race>(); //perform outer joins with related entities if (includes != null) foreach (string include in includes) result = result.Include(include); //here i need inner join insteard of default outer join result = result.Include("Rules"); return result.ToList(); } 2)Using Linq To Entity I need to have kind of outer join(somethin like in GetRace()) where i may pass a List with entities to include) and also i need to perform correct inner join with entity Rules public static IEnumerable<Race> GetRace2(List<string> includes, DateTime date) { IRepository repository = new Repository(new BEntities()); IEnumerable<Race> result = from o in repository.AsQueryable<Race>() from b in o.RaceBetRules select new { o }); //I need here: // 1. to perform the same way inner joins with related entities like with ObjectQuery above //here i getting List<AnonymousType> which i cant cast to //IEnumerable<Race> when i did try to cast like //(IEnumerable<Race>)result.ToList(); i did get error: //Unable to cast object of type //'System.Collections.Generic.List`1[<>f__AnonymousType0`1[BetsTipster.Entity.Tip.Types.Race]]' //to type //'System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable`1[BetsTipster.Entity.Tip.Types.Race]'. return result.ToList(); } May be someone have some ideas about that.

    Read the article

  • Inheritance Mapping Strategies with Entity Framework Code First CTP5: Part 3 – Table per Concrete Type (TPC) and Choosing Strategy Guidelines

    - by mortezam
    This is the third (and last) post in a series that explains different approaches to map an inheritance hierarchy with EF Code First. I've described these strategies in previous posts: Part 1 – Table per Hierarchy (TPH) Part 2 – Table per Type (TPT)In today’s blog post I am going to discuss Table per Concrete Type (TPC) which completes the inheritance mapping strategies supported by EF Code First. At the end of this post I will provide some guidelines to choose an inheritance strategy mainly based on what we've learned in this series. TPC and Entity Framework in the Past Table per Concrete type is somehow the simplest approach suggested, yet using TPC with EF is one of those concepts that has not been covered very well so far and I've seen in some resources that it was even discouraged. The reason for that is just because Entity Data Model Designer in VS2010 doesn't support TPC (even though the EF runtime does). That basically means if you are following EF's Database-First or Model-First approaches then configuring TPC requires manually writing XML in the EDMX file which is not considered to be a fun practice. Well, no more. You'll see that with Code First, creating TPC is perfectly possible with fluent API just like other strategies and you don't need to avoid TPC due to the lack of designer support as you would probably do in other EF approaches. Table per Concrete Type (TPC)In Table per Concrete type (aka Table per Concrete class) we use exactly one table for each (nonabstract) class. All properties of a class, including inherited properties, can be mapped to columns of this table, as shown in the following figure: As you can see, the SQL schema is not aware of the inheritance; effectively, we’ve mapped two unrelated tables to a more expressive class structure. If the base class was concrete, then an additional table would be needed to hold instances of that class. I have to emphasize that there is no relationship between the database tables, except for the fact that they share some similar columns. TPC Implementation in Code First Just like the TPT implementation, we need to specify a separate table for each of the subclasses. We also need to tell Code First that we want all of the inherited properties to be mapped as part of this table. In CTP5, there is a new helper method on EntityMappingConfiguration class called MapInheritedProperties that exactly does this for us. Here is the complete object model as well as the fluent API to create a TPC mapping: public abstract class BillingDetail {     public int BillingDetailId { get; set; }     public string Owner { get; set; }     public string Number { get; set; } }          public class BankAccount : BillingDetail {     public string BankName { get; set; }     public string Swift { get; set; } }          public class CreditCard : BillingDetail {     public int CardType { get; set; }     public string ExpiryMonth { get; set; }     public string ExpiryYear { get; set; } }      public class InheritanceMappingContext : DbContext {     public DbSet<BillingDetail> BillingDetails { get; set; }              protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)     {         modelBuilder.Entity<BankAccount>().Map(m =>         {             m.MapInheritedProperties();             m.ToTable("BankAccounts");         });         modelBuilder.Entity<CreditCard>().Map(m =>         {             m.MapInheritedProperties();             m.ToTable("CreditCards");         });                 } } The Importance of EntityMappingConfiguration ClassAs a side note, it worth mentioning that EntityMappingConfiguration class turns out to be a key type for inheritance mapping in Code First. Here is an snapshot of this class: namespace System.Data.Entity.ModelConfiguration.Configuration.Mapping {     public class EntityMappingConfiguration<TEntityType> where TEntityType : class     {         public ValueConditionConfiguration Requires(string discriminator);         public void ToTable(string tableName);         public void MapInheritedProperties();     } } As you have seen so far, we used its Requires method to customize TPH. We also used its ToTable method to create a TPT and now we are using its MapInheritedProperties along with ToTable method to create our TPC mapping. TPC Configuration is Not Done Yet!We are not quite done with our TPC configuration and there is more into this story even though the fluent API we saw perfectly created a TPC mapping for us in the database. To see why, let's start working with our object model. For example, the following code creates two new objects of BankAccount and CreditCard types and tries to add them to the database: using (var context = new InheritanceMappingContext()) {     BankAccount bankAccount = new BankAccount();     CreditCard creditCard = new CreditCard() { CardType = 1 };                      context.BillingDetails.Add(bankAccount);     context.BillingDetails.Add(creditCard);     context.SaveChanges(); } Running this code throws an InvalidOperationException with this message: The changes to the database were committed successfully, but an error occurred while updating the object context. The ObjectContext might be in an inconsistent state. Inner exception message: AcceptChanges cannot continue because the object's key values conflict with another object in the ObjectStateManager. Make sure that the key values are unique before calling AcceptChanges. The reason we got this exception is because DbContext.SaveChanges() internally invokes SaveChanges method of its internal ObjectContext. ObjectContext's SaveChanges method on its turn by default calls AcceptAllChanges after it has performed the database modifications. AcceptAllChanges method merely iterates over all entries in ObjectStateManager and invokes AcceptChanges on each of them. Since the entities are in Added state, AcceptChanges method replaces their temporary EntityKey with a regular EntityKey based on the primary key values (i.e. BillingDetailId) that come back from the database and that's where the problem occurs since both the entities have been assigned the same value for their primary key by the database (i.e. on both BillingDetailId = 1) and the problem is that ObjectStateManager cannot track objects of the same type (i.e. BillingDetail) with the same EntityKey value hence it throws. If you take a closer look at the TPC's SQL schema above, you'll see why the database generated the same values for the primary keys: the BillingDetailId column in both BankAccounts and CreditCards table has been marked as identity. How to Solve The Identity Problem in TPC As you saw, using SQL Server’s int identity columns doesn't work very well together with TPC since there will be duplicate entity keys when inserting in subclasses tables with all having the same identity seed. Therefore, to solve this, either a spread seed (where each table has its own initial seed value) will be needed, or a mechanism other than SQL Server’s int identity should be used. Some other RDBMSes have other mechanisms allowing a sequence (identity) to be shared by multiple tables, and something similar can be achieved with GUID keys in SQL Server. While using GUID keys, or int identity keys with different starting seeds will solve the problem but yet another solution would be to completely switch off identity on the primary key property. As a result, we need to take the responsibility of providing unique keys when inserting records to the database. We will go with this solution since it works regardless of which database engine is used. Switching Off Identity in Code First We can switch off identity simply by placing DatabaseGenerated attribute on the primary key property and pass DatabaseGenerationOption.None to its constructor. DatabaseGenerated attribute is a new data annotation which has been added to System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations namespace in CTP5: public abstract class BillingDetail {     [DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGenerationOption.None)]     public int BillingDetailId { get; set; }     public string Owner { get; set; }     public string Number { get; set; } } As always, we can achieve the same result by using fluent API, if you prefer that: modelBuilder.Entity<BillingDetail>()             .Property(p => p.BillingDetailId)             .HasDatabaseGenerationOption(DatabaseGenerationOption.None); Working With The Object Model Our TPC mapping is ready and we can try adding new records to the database. But, like I said, now we need to take care of providing unique keys when creating new objects: using (var context = new InheritanceMappingContext()) {     BankAccount bankAccount = new BankAccount()      {          BillingDetailId = 1                          };     CreditCard creditCard = new CreditCard()      {          BillingDetailId = 2,         CardType = 1     };                      context.BillingDetails.Add(bankAccount);     context.BillingDetails.Add(creditCard);     context.SaveChanges(); } Polymorphic Associations with TPC is Problematic The main problem with this approach is that it doesn’t support Polymorphic Associations very well. After all, in the database, associations are represented as foreign key relationships and in TPC, the subclasses are all mapped to different tables so a polymorphic association to their base class (abstract BillingDetail in our example) cannot be represented as a simple foreign key relationship. For example, consider the the domain model we introduced here where User has a polymorphic association with BillingDetail. This would be problematic in our TPC Schema, because if User has a many-to-one relationship with BillingDetail, the Users table would need a single foreign key column, which would have to refer both concrete subclass tables. This isn’t possible with regular foreign key constraints. Schema Evolution with TPC is Complex A further conceptual problem with this mapping strategy is that several different columns, of different tables, share exactly the same semantics. This makes schema evolution more complex. For example, a change to a base class property results in changes to multiple columns. It also makes it much more difficult to implement database integrity constraints that apply to all subclasses. Generated SQLLet's examine SQL output for polymorphic queries in TPC mapping. For example, consider this polymorphic query for all BillingDetails and the resulting SQL statements that being executed in the database: var query = from b in context.BillingDetails select b; Just like the SQL query generated by TPT mapping, the CASE statements that you see in the beginning of the query is merely to ensure columns that are irrelevant for a particular row have NULL values in the returning flattened table. (e.g. BankName for a row that represents a CreditCard type). TPC's SQL Queries are Union Based As you can see in the above screenshot, the first SELECT uses a FROM-clause subquery (which is selected with a red rectangle) to retrieve all instances of BillingDetails from all concrete class tables. The tables are combined with a UNION operator, and a literal (in this case, 0 and 1) is inserted into the intermediate result; (look at the lines highlighted in yellow.) EF reads this to instantiate the correct class given the data from a particular row. A union requires that the queries that are combined, project over the same columns; hence, EF has to pad and fill up nonexistent columns with NULL. This query will really perform well since here we can let the database optimizer find the best execution plan to combine rows from several tables. There is also no Joins involved so it has a better performance than the SQL queries generated by TPT where a Join is required between the base and subclasses tables. Choosing Strategy GuidelinesBefore we get into this discussion, I want to emphasize that there is no one single "best strategy fits all scenarios" exists. As you saw, each of the approaches have their own advantages and drawbacks. Here are some rules of thumb to identify the best strategy in a particular scenario: If you don’t require polymorphic associations or queries, lean toward TPC—in other words, if you never or rarely query for BillingDetails and you have no class that has an association to BillingDetail base class. I recommend TPC (only) for the top level of your class hierarchy, where polymorphism isn’t usually required, and when modification of the base class in the future is unlikely. If you do require polymorphic associations or queries, and subclasses declare relatively few properties (particularly if the main difference between subclasses is in their behavior), lean toward TPH. Your goal is to minimize the number of nullable columns and to convince yourself (and your DBA) that a denormalized schema won’t create problems in the long run. If you do require polymorphic associations or queries, and subclasses declare many properties (subclasses differ mainly by the data they hold), lean toward TPT. Or, depending on the width and depth of your inheritance hierarchy and the possible cost of joins versus unions, use TPC. By default, choose TPH only for simple problems. For more complex cases (or when you’re overruled by a data modeler insisting on the importance of nullability constraints and normalization), you should consider the TPT strategy. But at that point, ask yourself whether it may not be better to remodel inheritance as delegation in the object model (delegation is a way of making composition as powerful for reuse as inheritance). Complex inheritance is often best avoided for all sorts of reasons unrelated to persistence or ORM. EF acts as a buffer between the domain and relational models, but that doesn’t mean you can ignore persistence concerns when designing your classes. SummaryIn this series, we focused on one of the main structural aspect of the object/relational paradigm mismatch which is inheritance and discussed how EF solve this problem as an ORM solution. We learned about the three well-known inheritance mapping strategies and their implementations in EF Code First. Hopefully it gives you a better insight about the mapping of inheritance hierarchies as well as choosing the best strategy for your particular scenario. Happy New Year and Happy Code-Firsting! References ADO.NET team blog Java Persistence with Hibernate book a { color: #5A99FF; } a:visited { color: #5A99FF; } .title { padding-bottom: 5px; font-family: Segoe UI; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold; padding-top: 15px; } .code, .typeName { font-family: consolas; } .typeName { color: #2b91af; } .padTop5 { padding-top: 5px; } .padTop10 { padding-top: 10px; } .exception { background-color: #f0f0f0; font-style: italic; padding-bottom: 5px; padding-left: 5px; padding-top: 5px; padding-right: 5px; }

    Read the article

  • Global Entity Framework Context in WPF Application

    - by OffApps Cory
    Good day, I am in the middle of development of a WPF application that is using Entity Framework (.NET 3.5). It accesses the entities in several places throughout. I am worried about consistency throughout the application in regard to the entities. Should I be instancing separate contexts in my different views, or should I (and is a a good way to do this) instance a single context that can be accessed globally? For instance, my entity model has three sections, Shipments (with child packages and further child contents), Companies/Contacts (with child addresses and telephones), and disk specs. The Shipments and EditShipment views access the DiskSpecs, and the OptionsView manages the DiskSpecs (Create, Edit, Delete). If I edit a DiskSpec, I have to have something in the ShipmentsView to retrieve the latest specs if I have separate contexts right? If it is safe to have one overall context from which the rest of the app retrieves it's objects, then I imagine that is the way to go. If so, where would that instance be put? I am using VB.NET, but I can translate from C# pretty good. Any help would be appreciated. I just don't want one of those applications where the user has to hit reload a dozen times in different parts of the app to get the new data. Update: OK so I have changed my app as follows: All contexts are created in Using Blocks to dispose of them after they are no longer needed. When loaded, all entities are detatched from context before it is disposed. A new property in the MainViewModel (ContextUpdated) raises an event that all of the other ViewModels subscribe to which runs that ViewModels RefreshEntities method. After implementing this, I started getting errors saying that an entity can only be referenced by one ChangeTracker at a time. Since I could not figure out which context was still referencing the entity (shouldn't be any context right?) I cast the object as IEntityWithChangeTracker, and set SetChangeTracker to nothing (Null). This has let to the current problem: When I Null the changeTracker on the Entity, and then attach it to a context, it loses it's changed state and does not get updated to the database. However if I do not null the change tracker, I can't attach. I have my own change tracking code, so that is not a problem. My new question is, how are you supposed to do this. A good example Entity query and entity save code snipped would go a long way, cause I am beating my head in trying to get what I once thought was a simple transaction to work. Any help would elevate you to near god-hood.

    Read the article

  • Generating EF Code First model classes from an existing database

    - by Jon Galloway
    Entity Framework Code First is a lightweight way to "turn on" data access for a simple CLR class. As the name implies, the intended use is that you're writing the code first and thinking about the database later. However, I really like the Entity Framework Code First works, and I want to use it in existing projects and projects with pre-existing databases. For example, MVC Music Store comes with a SQL Express database that's pre-loaded with a catalog of music (including genres, artists, and songs), and while it may eventually make sense to load that seed data from a different source, for the MVC 3 release we wanted to keep using the existing database. While I'm not getting the full benefit of Code First - writing code which drives the database schema - I can still benefit from the simplicity of the lightweight code approach. Scott Guthrie blogged about how to use entity framework with an existing database, looking at how you can override the Entity Framework Code First conventions so that it can work with a database which was created following other conventions. That gives you the information you need to create the model classes manually. However, it turns out that with Entity Framework 4 CTP 5, there's a way to generate the model classes from the database schema. Once the grunt work is done, of course, you can go in and modify the model classes as you'd like, but you can save the time and frustration of figuring out things like mapping SQL database types to .NET types. Note that this template requires Entity Framework 4 CTP 5 or later. You can install EF 4 CTP 5 here. Step One: Generate an EF Model from your existing database The code generation system in Entity Framework works from a model. You can add a model to your existing project and delete it when you're done, but I think it's simpler to just spin up a separate project to generate the model classes. When you're done, you can delete the project without affecting your application, or you may choose to keep it around in case you have other database schema updates which require model changes. I chose to add the Model classes to the Models folder of a new MVC 3 application. Right-click the folder and select "Add / New Item..."   Next, select ADO.NET Entity Data Model from the Data Templates list, and name it whatever you want (the name is unimportant).   Next, select "Generate from database." This is important - it's what kicks off the next few steps, which read your database's schema.   Now it's time to point the Entity Data Model Wizard at your existing database. I'll assume you know how to find your database - if not, I covered that a bit in the MVC Music Store tutorial section on Models and Data. Select your database, uncheck the "Save entity connection settings in Web.config" (since we won't be using them within the application), and click Next.   Now you can select the database objects you'd like modeled. I just selected all tables and clicked Finish.   And there's your model. If you want, you can make additional changes here before going on to generate the code.   Step Two: Add the DbContext Generator Like most code generation systems in Visual Studio lately, Entity Framework uses T4 templates which allow for some control over how the code is generated. K Scott Allen wrote a detailed article on T4 Templates and the Entity Framework on MSDN recently, if you'd like to know more. Fortunately for us, there's already a template that does just what we need without any customization. Right-click a blank space in the Entity Framework model surface and select "Add Code Generation Item..." Select the Code groupt in the Installed Templates section and pick the ADO.NET DbContext Generator. If you don't see this listed, make sure you've got EF 4 CTP 5 installed and that you're looking at the Code templates group. Note that the DbContext Generator template is similar to the EF POCO template which came out last year, but with "fix up" code (unnecessary in EF Code First) removed.   As soon as you do this, you'll two terrifying Security Warnings - unless you click the "Do not show this message again" checkbox the first time. It will also be displayed (twice) every time you rebuild the project, so I checked the box and no immediate harm befell my computer (fingers crossed!).   Here's the payoff: two templates (filenames ending with .tt) have been added to the project, and they've generated the code I needed.   The "MusicStoreEntities.Context.tt" template built a DbContext class which holds the entity collections, and the "MusicStoreEntities.tt" template build a separate class for each table I selected earlier. We'll customize them in the next step. I recommend copying all the generated .cs files into your application at this point, since accidentally rebuilding the generation project will overwrite your changes if you leave them there. Step Three: Modify and use your POCO entity classes Note: I made a bunch of tweaks to my POCO classes after they were generated. You don't have to do any of this, but I think it's important that you can - they're your classes, and EF Code First respects that. Modify them as you need for your application, or don't. The Context class derives from DbContext, which is what turns on the EF Code First features. It holds a DbSet for each entity. Think of DbSet as a simple List, but with Entity Framework features turned on.   //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ // <auto-generated> // This code was generated from a template. // // Changes to this file may cause incorrect behavior and will be lost if // the code is regenerated. // </auto-generated> //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ namespace EF_CodeFirst_From_Existing_Database.Models { using System; using System.Data.Entity; public partial class Entities : DbContext { public Entities() : base("name=Entities") { } public DbSet<Album> Albums { get; set; } public DbSet<Artist> Artists { get; set; } public DbSet<Cart> Carts { get; set; } public DbSet<Genre> Genres { get; set; } public DbSet<OrderDetail> OrderDetails { get; set; } public DbSet<Order> Orders { get; set; } } } It's a pretty lightweight class as generated, so I just took out the comments, set the namespace, removed the constructor, and formatted it a bit. Done. If I wanted, though, I could have added or removed DbSets, overridden conventions, etc. using System.Data.Entity; namespace MvcMusicStore.Models { public class MusicStoreEntities : DbContext { public DbSet Albums { get; set; } public DbSet Genres { get; set; } public DbSet Artists { get; set; } public DbSet Carts { get; set; } public DbSet Orders { get; set; } public DbSet OrderDetails { get; set; } } } Next, it's time to look at the individual classes. Some of mine were pretty simple - for the Cart class, I just need to remove the header and clean up the namespace. //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ // // This code was generated from a template. // // Changes to this file may cause incorrect behavior and will be lost if // the code is regenerated. // //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ namespace EF_CodeFirst_From_Existing_Database.Models { using System; using System.Collections.Generic; public partial class Cart { // Primitive properties public int RecordId { get; set; } public string CartId { get; set; } public int AlbumId { get; set; } public int Count { get; set; } public System.DateTime DateCreated { get; set; } // Navigation properties public virtual Album Album { get; set; } } } I did a bit more customization on the Album class. Here's what was generated: //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ // // This code was generated from a template. // // Changes to this file may cause incorrect behavior and will be lost if // the code is regenerated. // //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ namespace EF_CodeFirst_From_Existing_Database.Models { using System; using System.Collections.Generic; public partial class Album { public Album() { this.Carts = new HashSet(); this.OrderDetails = new HashSet(); } // Primitive properties public int AlbumId { get; set; } public int GenreId { get; set; } public int ArtistId { get; set; } public string Title { get; set; } public decimal Price { get; set; } public string AlbumArtUrl { get; set; } // Navigation properties public virtual Artist Artist { get; set; } public virtual Genre Genre { get; set; } public virtual ICollection Carts { get; set; } public virtual ICollection OrderDetails { get; set; } } } I removed the header, changed the namespace, and removed some of the navigation properties. One nice thing about EF Code First is that you don't have to have a property for each database column or foreign key. In the Music Store sample, for instance, we build the app up using code first and start with just a few columns, adding in fields and navigation properties as the application needs them. EF Code First handles the columsn we've told it about and doesn't complain about the others. Here's the basic class: using System.ComponentModel; using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations; using System.Web.Mvc; using System.Collections.Generic; namespace MvcMusicStore.Models { public class Album { public int AlbumId { get; set; } public int GenreId { get; set; } public int ArtistId { get; set; } public string Title { get; set; } public decimal Price { get; set; } public string AlbumArtUrl { get; set; } public virtual Genre Genre { get; set; } public virtual Artist Artist { get; set; } public virtual List OrderDetails { get; set; } } } It's my class, not Entity Framework's, so I'm free to do what I want with it. I added a bunch of MVC 3 annotations for scaffolding and validation support, as shown below: using System.ComponentModel; using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations; using System.Web.Mvc; using System.Collections.Generic; namespace MvcMusicStore.Models { [Bind(Exclude = "AlbumId")] public class Album { [ScaffoldColumn(false)] public int AlbumId { get; set; } [DisplayName("Genre")] public int GenreId { get; set; } [DisplayName("Artist")] public int ArtistId { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "An Album Title is required")] [StringLength(160)] public string Title { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Price is required")] [Range(0.01, 100.00, ErrorMessage = "Price must be between 0.01 and 100.00")] public decimal Price { get; set; } [DisplayName("Album Art URL")] [StringLength(1024)] public string AlbumArtUrl { get; set; } public virtual Genre Genre { get; set; } public virtual Artist Artist { get; set; } public virtual List<OrderDetail> OrderDetails { get; set; } } } The end result was that I had working EF Code First model code for the finished application. You can follow along through the tutorial to see how I built up to the finished model classes, starting with simple 2-3 property classes and building up to the full working schema. Thanks to Diego Vega (on the Entity Framework team) for pointing me to the DbContext template.

    Read the article

  • LLBLGen Pro feature highlights: grouping model elements

    - by FransBouma
    (This post is part of a series of posts about features of the LLBLGen Pro system) When working with an entity model which has more than a few entities, it's often convenient to be able to group entities together if they belong to a semantic sub-model. For example, if your entity model has several entities which are about 'security', it would be practical to group them together under the 'security' moniker. This way, you could easily find them back, yet they can be left inside the complete entity model altogether so their relationships with entities outside the group are kept. In other situations your domain consists of semi-separate entity models which all target tables/views which are located in the same database. It then might be convenient to have a single project to manage the complete target database, yet have the entity models separate of each other and have them result in separate code bases. LLBLGen Pro can do both for you. This blog post will illustrate both situations. The feature is called group usage and is controllable through the project settings. This setting is supported on all supported O/R mapper frameworks. Situation one: grouping entities in a single model. This situation is common for entity models which are dense, so many relationships exist between all sub-models: you can't split them up easily into separate models (nor do you likely want to), however it's convenient to have them grouped together into groups inside the entity model at the project level. A typical example for this is the AdventureWorks example database for SQL Server. This database, which is a single catalog, has for each sub-group a schema, however most of these schemas are tightly connected with each other: adding all schemas together will give a model with entities which indirectly are related to all other entities. LLBLGen Pro's default setting for group usage is AsVisualGroupingMechanism which is what this situation is all about: we group the elements for visual purposes, it has no real meaning for the model nor the code generated. Let's reverse engineer AdventureWorks to an entity model. By default, LLBLGen Pro uses the target schema an element is in which is being reverse engineered, as the group it will be in. This is convenient if you already have categorized tables/views in schemas, like which is the case in AdventureWorks. Of course this can be switched off, or corrected on the fly. When reverse engineering, we'll walk through a wizard which will guide us with the selection of the elements which relational model data should be retrieved, which we can later on use to reverse engineer to an entity model. The first step after specifying which database server connect to is to select these elements. below we can see the AdventureWorks catalog as well as the different schemas it contains. We'll include all of them. After the wizard completes, we have all relational model data nicely in our catalog data, with schemas. So let's reverse engineer entities from the tables in these schemas. We select in the catalog explorer the schemas 'HumanResources', 'Person', 'Production', 'Purchasing' and 'Sales', then right-click one of them and from the context menu, we select Reverse engineer Tables to Entity Definitions.... This will bring up the dialog below. We check all checkboxes in one go by checking the checkbox at the top to mark them all to be added to the project. As you can see LLBLGen Pro has already filled in the group name based on the schema name, as this is the default and we didn't change the setting. If you want, you can select multiple rows at once and set the group name to something else using the controls on the dialog. We're fine with the group names chosen so we'll simply click Add to Project. This gives the following result:   (I collapsed the other groups to keep the picture small ;)). As you can see, the entities are now grouped. Just to see how dense this model is, I've expanded the relationships of Employee: As you can see, it has relationships with entities from three other groups than HumanResources. It's not doable to cut up this project into sub-models without duplicating the Employee entity in all those groups, so this model is better suited to be used as a single model resulting in a single code base, however it benefits greatly from having its entities grouped into separate groups at the project level, to make work done on the model easier. Now let's look at another situation, namely where we work with a single database while we want to have multiple models and for each model a separate code base. Situation two: grouping entities in separate models within the same project. To get rid of the entities to see the second situation in action, simply undo the reverse engineering action in the project. We still have the AdventureWorks relational model data in the catalog. To switch LLBLGen Pro to see each group in the project as a separate project, open the Project Settings, navigate to General and set Group usage to AsSeparateProjects. In the catalog explorer, select Person and Production, right-click them and select again Reverse engineer Tables to Entities.... Again check the checkbox at the top to mark all entities to be added and click Add to Project. We get two groups, as expected, however this time the groups are seen as separate projects. This means that the validation logic inside LLBLGen Pro will see it as an error if there's e.g. a relationship or an inheritance edge linking two groups together, as that would lead to a cyclic reference in the code bases. To see this variant of the grouping feature, seeing the groups as separate projects, in action, we'll generate code from the project with the two groups we just created: select from the main menu: Project -> Generate Source-code... (or press F7 ;)). In the dialog popping up, select the target .NET framework you want to use, the template preset, fill in a destination folder and click Start Generator (normal). This will start the code generator process. As expected the code generator has simply generated two code bases, one for Person and one for Production: The group name is used inside the namespace for the different elements. This allows you to add both code bases to a single solution and use them together in a different project without problems. Below is a snippet from the code file of a generated entity class. //... using System.Xml.Serialization; using AdventureWorks.Person; using AdventureWorks.Person.HelperClasses; using AdventureWorks.Person.FactoryClasses; using AdventureWorks.Person.RelationClasses; using SD.LLBLGen.Pro.ORMSupportClasses; namespace AdventureWorks.Person.EntityClasses { //... /// <summary>Entity class which represents the entity 'Address'.<br/><br/></summary> [Serializable] public partial class AddressEntity : CommonEntityBase //... The advantage of this is that you can have two code bases and work with them separately, yet have a single target database and maintain everything in a single location. If you decide to move to a single code base, you can do so with a change of one setting. It's also useful if you want to keep the groups as separate models (and code bases) yet want to add relationships to elements from another group using a copy of the entity: you can simply reverse engineer the target table to a new entity into a different group, effectively making a copy of the entity. As there's a single target database, changes made to that database are reflected in both models which makes maintenance easier than when you'd have a separate project for each group, with its own relational model data. Conclusion LLBLGen Pro offers a flexible way to work with entities in sub-models and control how the sub-models end up in the generated code.

    Read the article

  • Adding sub-entities to existing entities. Should it be done in the Entity and Component classes?

    - by Coyote
    I'm in a situation where a player can be given the control of small parts of an entity (i.e. Left missile battery). Therefore I started implementing sub entities as follow. Entities are Objects with 3 arrays: pointers to components pointers to sub entities communication subscribers (temporary implementation) Now when an entity is built it has a few components as you might expect and also I can attach sub entities which are handled with some dedicated code in the Entity and Component classes. I noticed sub entities are sharing data in 3 parts: position: the sub entities are using the parent's position and their own as an offset. scrips: sub entities are draining ammo and energy from the parent. physics: sub entities add weight to the parent I made this to quickly go forward, but as I'm slowly fixing current implementations I wonder if this wasn't a mistake. Is my current implementation something commonly done? Will this implementation put me in a corner? I thought it might be a better thing to create some sort of SubEntityComponent where sub entities are attached and handled. But before changing anything I wanted to seek the community's wisdom.

    Read the article

  • Using ADO.net Entity Framework 4 with Enumerations? How do I do it ?

    - by Perpetualcoder
    Question 1: I am playing around with EF4 and I have a model class like : public class Candidate { public int Id {get;set;} public string FullName {get;set;} public Gender Sex {get;set;} public EducationLevel HighestDegreeType {get;set;} } Here Gender and EducationLevel are Enums like: public enum Gender {Male,Female,Undisclosed} public enum EducationLevel {HighSchool,Bachelors,Masters,Doctorate} How do I get the Candidate Class and Gender and EducationLevel working with EF4 if: I do model first development I do db first development Edit: Moved question related to object context to another question here.

    Read the article

  • Does Entity Framework 4 not support property automatic lazy loading for model-first entities?

    - by KallDrexx
    All references that I find for lazy loading say it's possible but they all mention POCOs and that's it. I am using EF4 with the model-first methodology. In my model diagram I have a Project table and a UserObject table, with a 1 to many relationship between them. However, in code, when I have a valid UserObject and I attempt to get the project performing: Project prj = userobj.Project. Unfortunately, this doesn't work as it claims that UserObject.Project is null. It seems like I have to explicitly load the Project object via calling UserObject.ProjectReference.Load() prior to calling .Project. Is there any way for this to occur automatically when I access the .Project property?

    Read the article

  • Are there any good resources for developing Entity Framework 4 code-first?

    - by KallDrexx
    I am trying to convert my model-first project to code-first, as I can see dealing with the models with the graphical designer will become hard. Unfortunately, with all my googling I can't find one good reference that describes how to do code-first development. Most resources are out of date (so out of date they refer to it as code-only), and the other references I can find seem to assume you understand the basics of context building and code-first (for example, they reference code to build contexts but don't describe where that code should actually go, and how it's actually run). Are there any decent resources for code-first development, that describe how to map your POCO entities into a database schema?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >