Develop Reference

How to filter a sublist inside parent and return parent with sublist filtered

I want to create a linq to sql query that will return a list of objects with a sublist that has been filtered.
It sounds easy but I'm not sure how to make this to work
Here the SQL Query which returns what I want:
select * from Texts t inner join Translations tt on t.TranslationId = tt.Id
inner join Pages p on tt.Id = p.TranslationId and tt.NeutralText = p.TitleNeutralTextId
where t.LanguageId = 1
Now I have to write this with linq.
What I've done so far is:
var query = this.Queryable() // Page entity
.AsNoTracking()
.Include(x => x.TitleTranslation.Texts);
return (from m in query
from l in m.TitleTranslation.Texts
where m.TitleTranslation.Texts.Any(l => l.LanguageId == 1)
select m);
But it didn't work because I got the sublist with all languages instead of language with id #1 only.
Thanks for helping,
David

Any specific reason you are writing query? Either you can use Eager Loading of EF to load all the child tables, Or below Linq statement can fetch the required result
var result = texts.Join(translations, t => t.TranslationId, tt => tt.Id, (t, tt) => new {t, tt})
.Join(pages, ttt => new { Id = ttt.tt.Id, NeutralTextId = ttt.tt.NeutralText }, p => new { Id = p.TranslationId, NeutralTextId = p.TitleNeutralTextId }, (ttt, p) => new {ttt, p})
.Where(tttt => tttt.ttt.t.LanguageId == 1);
Here replace texts, translations and pages with actual dbContext entities collection property.

I think you must try lime this. this will work for you .
This will be similar to sql query
One way to do this .
var result = from m in Texts
join Translations on Texts.TranslationId = Translation.Id
Join Pages on Translations.NeutralText = Pages.NeutralText
where Texts.LanguageId = 1
select m
There an other way to do this using entity framework
var result =
this.Queryable().AsNoTracking().Include(x=>x.Translations).Where(x=>x.LanguageId= 1)

I found the solution I wanted thanks to Hasnain Bukhari.
The solution was to start from the text table, assign the filter, include the desired Entity (Page) and put the results into memory (ToList()). Then select pages. It will give the result I want in the order I have to.
var query = textService.Queryable()
.AsNoTracking()
.Include(x => x.Translation.Pages)
.Where(x => x.LanguageId == languageId).ToList();
return query.SelectMany(x => x.Translation.Pages);

Linq Query To Group All Other Than Top 3

I have the following code in Linq, and I was wondering how to make it so that it groups all others beside the top 3 into an others category and sum their volumes.
var list = (from t in sortedCollection.DataItem
orderby t.volume
select t).Take(3);

You need to use Skip to ignore top 3 and group the rest like:
var list = (from t in sortedCollection.DataItem
orderby t.volume
select t).Skip(3);
From the comments, it seems you only want to get the sum of a particular field after skipping first 3 records.
var sum = (from t in sortedCollection.DataItem
orderby t.volume
select t).Skip(3).Sum(r=> r.VOLUME);
Or with a complete method syntax:
var Sum = sortedCollection.DateItem.OrderBy(t => t.volume)
.Skip(3)
.Sum(r=> r.volume);
If you need grouping , that it would look like:
With method syntax it should be something like:
var query = sortedCollection.DateItem.OrderBy(t => t.volume)
.Skip(3)
.GroupBy(t => t.YourGroupingField);
To do Sum based on a field you can do something like:
var query = sortedCollection.DateItem.OrderBy(t => t.volume)
.Skip(3)
.GroupBy(t => t.YourGroupingField)
.Select(grp => new SqlCommand(
{
Key = grp.Key,
Sum = grp.Sum(r=> r.ValueFieldForSum)
}));

Linq - Group, Sum and Max

I've been stuck with this problem for a few days now.
How do I group by PartCode, take the Max/Min or First value of the Description (items with the same partcode may have a different description), and then sum of the other fields. What I currently have is shown below:
var lengths =
from q in
(from p in partList
select new { p.PartCode, p.Description, p.Quantity, p.TotalMeter, p.PurchaseLength })
group q by new { q.PartCode, q.Description, q.Quantity, q.TotalMeter, q.PurchaseLength } into g
orderby g.Key.PartCode
select new
{
PartCode = g.Max(p => p.PartCode),
Description = g.Max(p => p.Description),
Quantity = g.Sum(p => p.Quantity),
TotalMeter = g.Sum(p => p.TotalMeter),
PurchaseLength = g.Sum(p => p.PurchaseLength)
};

I see two main problems here:
The first is that you say you want to group by PartCode, but instead you're grouping by a combination of everything.
Another possible problem is that you're using Max() on what I can only assume to be collections of strings. This won't fail, but it will select the value that is last in alphabetical order (is that what you want?).
Try this:
var lengths =
from q in
(from p in partList
select new { p.PartCode, p.Description, p.Quantity,
p.TotalMeter, p.PurchaseLength })
group q by q.PartCode into g
orderby g.Key
select new
{
PartCode = g.First().PartCode,
Description = g.First().Description,
Quantity = g.Sum(p => p.Quantity),
TotalMeter = g.Sum(p => p.TotalMeter),
PurchaseLength = g.Sum(p => p.PurchaseLength)
};
If that doesn't solve your issue please tell us what your issue is.

LINQ: how to get a group of a table ordering with a related table?

I have a doubt about the object IGrouping that results from a linq where I use a "group by" sentence.
I have two tables in the database, Products and Responses they have a relationship 1 to *. In the Responses table we have a column called FinalRate which is the rate of the product. The products can have n responses or rates.
I want to get the Products order by the sum of the FinalRate divided by the number of rates done. That is to say, order by the average rate descending from higher to lower marks.
As it can be read in the code (at the end of the question), I try to get the responses first. To sum all the finalrates and divide them by the count I use a group.
There are 2 problems with the code, even if the current code works:
1.-I tried to get the Products in a single query but it is impossible because I can not use the products table in the group and then use the Response table in the "orderby". One more thing LINQ only gives you the possibility to group one table, it is imposible to have "group prod, response".
I couldn't get this sql sentence in LINQ:
select prod.ProductID,prod.Commercial_Product_Name,prod.Manufacturer_Name,
prod.ProductImageUrl
from rev_product prod
inner join rev_response res on res.AtProductid=prod.ProductID
group by prod.ProductID,prod.Commercial_Product_Name,prod.Manufacturer_Name
,prod.ProductImageUrl
order by (sum(res.FinalRate)/count(res.AtProductid))
I tried this:
var gruposproductos = (from prod in ctx.Products
join res in ctx.Responses on prod.ProductID equals res.AtProductId
group prod by prod.ProductID into g
orderby (g.Sum(ra =>ra.FinalRate)/g.Count())
descending select g).Take(2);
But as I say, the "orderby (g.Sum..." gives an error, because "into g" groups the Product table, not the Response Table.
So this is why in my final code I don't get the products in the same LINQ sentence.
2.-Once accepted this fact, the problem is that I get an IGrouping, but I don't obtain a list of Responses that I can iterate without doing the two foreach in the code. I wanted only one loop, as one would do if you had a "List" object.
It is not really a cool method but it works. Moreover, I have to control that in the second loop there is only added 1 time.
Any better code?
var groupproducts = (from res in ctx.Responses
group res by res.AtProductId into g
orderby (g.Sum(ra =>ra.FinalRate)/g.Count())
descending select g).Take(2).ToList();
List<Product> theproducts = new List<Product>();
foreach (var groupresponse in groupproducts)
{
foreach (var response in groupresponse)
{
var producttemp= (from prod in ctx.Products
where prod.ProductID == response.AtProductId
select prod).First();
theproducts.Add(producttemp);
}
}
}
FINAL SOLUTION (thx a lot #Daniel)
var productsanonymtype = ctx.Products.Select(x => new
{
Product = x,
AverageRating = x.Responses.Count() == 0 ? 0 : x.Responses.Select(r => (double)r.FinalRate).Sum() / x.Responses.Count()
}).OrderByDescending(x => x.AverageRating);
List<Product> products = new List<Product>();
foreach (var prod in productsanonymtype)
{
products.Add(prod.Product);
}

Try this:
products.Select(x => new
{
Product = x,
AverageRating = x.Responses.Sum(x => x.FinalRate) /
x.Responses.Count()
});
The Sum overload I am using is not implemented in all providers. If that's a problem for you, you can use this alternate version:
products.Select(x => new
{
Product = x,
AverageRating = x.Responses.Select(x => x.FinalRate)
.Sum() /
x.Responses.Count()
});
If there is no navigation property from product to its responses you should first try to fix that. If you can't you can use this version:
products.Join(responses, x => x.Id, x => x.ProductId,
(p, r) => new { Product = p, Response = r })
.GroupBy(x => x.Product)
.Select(g => new { Product = g.Key,
AverageRating = g.Select(x => x.Response.FinalRate)
.Sum() /
g.Count()
});
Assuming FinalRate is an int, both methods will calculate the average rating with an int, i.e. there will be no 4.5 rating. And there will be no rounding, i.e. an actual average rating of 4.9 will result in 4. You can fix that by casting one of the operands of the division to double.
Another problem is the case with no ratings so far. The code above will result in an exception in this case. If that's a problem for you, you can change the calculation to this:
AverageRating = g.Count() == 0
? 0
: g.Select(x => (double)x.Response.FinalRate).Sum() / g.Count()

ctx.Products.GroupBy(x => new {
ProductId = x.ProductId,
FinalRate = x.Responses.Sum(y => y.FinalRate),
CountProductId = x.Responses.Count
})
.OrderBy(x => x.Key.FinalRate / x.Key.CountProductId);
And here with the projection.....
ctx.Products.Select(x => new {
ProductID = x.ProductID,
Commercial_Product_Name = x.Commercial_Product_Name,
Manufacturer_Name = x.Manufacturer_Name,
ProductImageUrl = x.ProductImageUrl,
FinalRate = x.Responses.Sum(y => y.FinalRate),
CountProductId = x.Responses.Count
})
.GroupBy(x => new {
ProductId = x.ProductId,
FinalRate = x.FinalRate,
CountProductId = x.CountProductId
})
.OrderBy(x => x.Key.FinalRate / x.Key.CountProductId);

How to join 3 tables with lambda expression?

I have a simple LINQ lambda join query but I want to add a 3rd join with a where clause. How do I go about doing that?
Here's my single join query:
var myList = Companies
.Join(
Sectors,
comp => comp.Sector_code,
sect => sect.Sector_code,
(comp, sect) => new {Company = comp, Sector = sect} )
.Select( c => new {
c.Company.Equity_cusip,
c.Company.Company_name,
c.Company.Primary_exchange,
c.Company.Sector_code,
c.Sector.Description
});
I want to add the following SQL command to the above LINQ query and still maintain the projections:
SELECT
sector_code, industry_code
FROM
distribution_sector_industry
WHERE
service = 'numerical'
The 3rd join would be made with Sector table & Distribution_sector_industry on sector_code.
Thanks in advance.

Just a guess:
var myList = Companies
.Join(
Sectors,
comp => comp.Sector_code,
sect => sect.Sector_code,
(comp, sect) => new { Company = comp, Sector = sect })
.Join(
DistributionSectorIndustry.Where(dsi => dsi.Service == "numerical"),
cs => cs.Sector.Sector_code,
dsi => dsi.Sector_code,
(cs, dsi) => new { cs.Company, cs.Sector, IndustryCode = dsi.Industry_code })
.Select(c => new {
c.Company.Equity_cusip,
c.Company.Company_name,
c.Company.Primary_exchange,
c.Company.Sector_code,
c.Sector.Description,
c.IndustryCode
});

Okay, I can't see why you'd want to select sector_code when you already know it, but I think you want this:
var query = from company in Companies
join sector in Sectors
on company.SectorCode equals sector.SectorCode
join industry in DistributionSectorIndustry
on sector.SectorCode equals industry.SectorCode
where industry.Service == "numerical"
select new {
company.EquityCusip,
company.CompanyName,
company.PrimaryExchange,
company.SectorCode,
sector.Description,
industry.IndustryCode
};
Notes:
I've changed it into a query expression as that's a much more readable way of expressing a query like this.
Although the "where" clause comes after the join, assuming this is a LINQ to SQL or Entity Framework query, it shouldn't make any difference
I've lengthened the range variable names for clarity
I've converted your other names into conventional .NET names; you can do this too in your model

For 4 Tables
var query = CurrencyDeposits
.Join(Customers, cd => cd.CustomerId, cus => cus.Id, (cd, cus)
=> new { CurrencyDeposit = cd, Customer = cus })
.Join(Currencies, x => x.CurrencyDeposit.CurrencyId, cr => cr.Id, (x, cr)
=> new { x.CurrencyDeposit, x.Customer, Currency = cr })
.Join(Banks, x => x.CurrencyDeposit.BankId, bn => bn.Id, (x, bn)
=> new { x.CurrencyDeposit, x.Customer, x.Currency, Bank = bn})
.Select(s => new {
s.CurrencyDeposit.Id,
s.Customer.NameSurname,
s.Currency.Code,
s.Bank.BankName,
s.CurrencyDeposit.RequesCode
});

Try something like this...
var myList = ({from a in Companies
join b in Sectors on a.Sector_code equals b.Sector_code
join c in Distribution on b.distribution_code equals a.distribution_code
select new {...});