Develop Reference

LINQ 3 Inner Joins with 1 Left Outer Join

Wondering why LINQ doesn't have a Left Join method. I've been trying to figure this out with myriad examples on SO, but no such luck. The other examples show simple examples with one join. If I group the joins then I only get references to the TradeCountries table in the select statement.
Being new to LINQ, I could've had this done 4 hours ago with a simple SELECT statement, but here I'm am trying to figure out why the LeftJoin method was left out of LINQ.
What does the line with "LeftJoin" need to be changed to make this work?
/*
* GetTop5Distributors
#param int array of series IDs
*/
public List<TopDistributors> Get5TopDistributors(IEnumerable<int> seriesIds)
{
_context = new MySQLDatabaseContext();
var result = _context.TradesTrades
.Join(_context.TradesSeries, tt => tt.SeriesId, ts => ts.Id, (tt, ts) => new { tt, ts })
.Join(_context.TradesTradeDistributors, tsd => tsd.tt.Id, ttd => ttd.TradeId,
(tsd, ttd) => new { tsd, ttd })
.Join(_context.TradesOrganisations, tsdto => tsdto.ttd.DistributorId, to => to.Id,
(tsdto, to) => new { tsdto, to })
.LeftJoin(_context.TradesCountries, tsdc => tsdc.to.CountryId, tc => tc.Id,
(tsdc, tc) => new {tsdc, tc})
.Where(x => seriesIds.Contains(x.tsdc.tsdto.tsd.tt.SeriesId))
.Where(x => x.tsdc.tsdto.tsd.tt.FirstPartyId == null)
.Where(x => x.tsdc.tsdto.tsd.tt.Status != "closed")
.Where(x => x.tsdc.tsdto.tsd.tt.Status != "cancelled")
.GroupBy(n => new { n.tsdc.tsdto.tsd.tt.SeriesId, n.tsdc.tsdto.ttd.DistributorId })
.Select(g =>
new TopDistributors
{
SeriesId = g.Key.SeriesId,
DistributorName = g.Select(i => i.tsdc.to.Name).Distinct().First(),
IsinNickname = g.Select(i => i.tsdc.tsdto.tsd.ts.Nickname).Distinct().First(),
CountryName = g.Select(i => i.tc.Name).Distinct().First(),
CommissionTotal = Math.Ceiling(g.Sum(i => i.tsdc.tsdto.ttd.Commission))
}
)
.OrderByDescending(x => x.CommissionTotal)
.Take(5)
.ToList();
return result;
}
Here's the rather simple select statement that is taking orders or magnitude too long to convert to LINQ.
SELECT
trades_trades.series_id,
trades_organisations.`name`,
trades_series.nickname,
trades_countries.name as Country_Name,
SUM(trades_trade_distributors.commission) as Commission_Total
FROM
trades_trades
JOIN trades_series
ON trades_series.id = trades_trades.series_id
JOIN trades_trade_distributors
ON trades_trades.id = trades_trade_distributors.trade_id
JOIN trades_organisations
ON trades_trade_distributors.distributor_id = trades_organisations.id
LEFT JOIN trades_countries
ON trades_organisations.country_id = trades_countries.id
WHERE trades_trades.series_id IN (
17,
18)
AND trades_trades.first_party_id IS NULL
AND trades_trades.status <> 'closed'
AND trades_trades.status <> 'cancelled'
GROUP BY trades_trades.series_id, trades_trade_distributors.distributor_id
ORDER BY Commission_Total DESC

Following my recipe, here is a more or less straightforward translation of the SQL to LINQ. I moved the where to be near what it constrains, and used let to create a convenient name for the Sum, as LINQ doesn't allow you to forward reference anonymous object members.
var ans = from tt in trades_trades
where new[] { 17, 18 }.Contains(tt.series_id) && tt.first_party_id == null &&
tt.status != "closed" && tt.status != "cancelled"
join ts in trades_series on tt.series_id equals ts.id
join ttd in trades_trade_distributors on tt.id equals ttd.trade_id
join to in trades_orginizations on ttd.distributor_id equals to.id
join tc in trades_countries on to.country_id equals tc.id into tcj
from tc in tcj.DefaultIfEmpty() // GroupJoin -> left join
group new { tt, ts, ttd, to, tc } by new { tt.series_id, ttd.distributor_id } into tradeg
let Commission_Total = tradeg.Sum(trade => trade.ttd.commission)
orderby Commission_Total descending
select new {
tradeg.Key.series_id,
tradeg.First().to.name,
tradeg.First().ts.nickname,
Country_Name = tradeg.First().tc == null ? null : tradeg.First().tc.name,
Commission_Total
};

GroupJoin with top selection on join table using Linq for Entities lambda

I have a table with a many->many relationship although not classified as such in the database schema.
I have the following SQL that I would like to replicate with equivalent lambdas.
SELECT S1.ServiceId, S1.ServiceDate, S1.TrainNumber, S1.SourceMessageRef,
S2.SourceMessageRef, S1.Created, S2.Created, S1.vehicles, S1.grossWeight, S1.NettWeight, S1.Tare, S1.Nominal, S2.ConsignmentNoteNum, S2.NumOfWagons, S2.GrossWeight, S2.NettWeight, S2.NominalTonnes
FROM (select c.ServiceId, c.ServiceDate, c.TrainNumber, c.SourceMessageRef, c.Created, COUNT(1) as vehicles, SUM(c.GrossWeight) AS GrossWeight, SUM(c.NettWeight) as NettWeight, sum(c.TareWeight) as Tare, sum(c.NominalWeight) as Nominal
from [Staging].[Consists] c
GROUP BY [ServiceId],[ServiceDate],[TrainNumber],[SourceMessageRef],[Created]
) AS S1
LEFT OUTER JOIN (SELECT c.Created, c.SourceMessageRef, c.ServiceId,
c.ServiceDate, c.ConsignmentNoteNum, c.GrossWeight,
c.NettWeight, c.NominalTonnes, c.NumOfWagons,
row_number() over (partition by c.ServiceId, c.ServiceDate order by c.Created DESC) as rn
FROM [Staging].[Consignment] c ) S2
ON S2.ServiceId = S1.ServiceId AND S2.ServiceDate = S1.ServiceDate AND S2.rn = 1
ORDER BY S2.ServiceDate DESC, S1.Created DESC, S2.SourceMessageRef DESC, S1.SourceMessageRef DESC
So far the best I can achieve is :
var consists = db.Consists
.GroupBy(c => new { c.ServiceId, c.ServiceDate, c.SourceMessageRef })
.GroupJoin(db.Consignments,
a => new { a.Key.ServiceId, a.Key.ServiceDate },
b => new { b.ServiceId, b.ServiceDate },
(a, b) => new ConsistOverviewDto()
{
ServiceId = a.Key.ServiceId,
ServiceDate = a.Key.ServiceDate,
TrainNumber = a.FirstOrDefault().TrainNumber,
ConsistVehicleCount = a.Count(),
ConsistGrossWeight = a.Sum(a1 => a1.GrossWeight ?? 0m),
ConsistNettWeight = a.Sum(a1 => a1.NettWeight ?? 0m),
ConsistTareWeight = a.Sum(a1 => a1.TareWeight ?? 0m),
ConsistNominalWeight = a.Sum(a1 => a1.NominalWeight ?? 0),
ConsignmentVehicleCount = b.Count(),
ConsignmentGrossWeight = b.Sum(b1 => b1.GrossWeight ?? 0m),
ConsigmentNettWeight = b.Sum(b1 => b1.NettWeight ?? 0m),
ConsignmentNominalWeight = b.Sum(b1 => b1.NominalTonnes ?? 0)
})
.OrderByDescending(c => c.ServiceDate);
This doesn't seem to come very close, particularly the concept of only wanting to match the first outer join entry if any present.
Can someone assist in demonstrating the lambda required to achieve the functionality similiar to the SQL attached.

Grouping and Sum some field with Sub query in LINQ

I'm trying to convert my sql query to linq, i confused about sum and grouping,
this is my query
SELECT
produk.supplier,
SUM(transaksi.jumlah_transaksi),
SUM(transaksi.nominal_transaksi),
operasional.nominal
FROM
transaksi INNER JOIN produk ON transaksi.id_produk = produk.id_produk
LEFT JOIN
(SELECT
operasional.id_supplier,
SUM(nominal) AS nominal
FROM
operasional) operasional
ON operasional.id_supplier = produk.id_supplier
GROUP BY produk.supplier
output should be
like this
Progress
i am just trying with linq query like this without grouping
var result = from t in db.transaksi
join p in db.produk on t.id_produk equals p.id_produk
from op in
(
from o in db.operasional
select new
{
id_supplier = o.id_supplier,
nominal = o.nominal
}
).Where(o => o.id_supplier == p.id_supplier).DefaultIfEmpty()
select new
{
nama_supplier = p.supplier,
jumlah_transaksi = t.jumlah_transaksi,
nominal_transaksi = t.nominal_transaksi,
biaya_operasional = op.nominal
};
and result query from my linq still like this
SELECT
`p`.`supplier`,
`t`.`jumlah_transaksi`,
`t`.`nominal_transaksi`,
`t1`.`nominal`
FROM
`transaksi` `t`
INNER JOIN `produk` `p`
ON `t`.`id_produk` = `p`.`id_produk`
LEFT JOIN `operasional` `t1`
ON `t1`.`id_supplier` = `p`.`id_supplier`
Solved
and this is my full linq
var result = from t in db.transaksi
join p in db.produk on t.id_produk equals p.id_produk
from op in
(
from o in db.operasional
group o by o.id_supplier into g
select new
{
id_supplier = g.First().id_supplier,
nominal = g.Sum(o => o.nominal)
}
).Where(o => o.id_supplier == p.id_supplier).DefaultIfEmpty()
select new
{
nama_supplier = p.supplier,
jumlah_transaksi = t.jumlah_transaksi,
nominal_transaksi = t.nominal_transaksi,
biaya_operasional = op.nominal
};
var grouped = result
.GroupBy(x => x.nama_supplier)
.Select(x => new
{
nama_supplier = x.Key,
jumlah_transaksi = x.Sum(s => s.jumlah_transaksi),
nominal_transaksi = x.Sum(s => s.nominal_transaksi),
biaya_operasional = x.Select(s => s.biaya_operasional).First()
});

Try to use GroupBy (in following code result is your query from code above):
var grouped = result
.GroupBy(x => x.nama_supplier)
.Select(x => new {
nama_supplier = x.Key,
sum1 = x.Sum(s => s.jumlah_transaksi),
sum1 = x.Sum(s => s.nominal_transaksi),
nominal = x.Select(s => s.biaya_operasional).First()
})
Code is not checked so use it just as idea.

Linq left join with group join

I have set of Users and Visits. (So user do visits)
Visit have User navigation property.
I need to find the users who don't visit.
I can do this by finding the users who visit, finding all of the users then taking the difference.
I was trying to find a solution which is faster.
This is what I have right now:
var users = _db.Users.AsNoTracking().Include(c => c.City).Where(x => x.City.Id == city);
var groupedUsers = _db.Visits.AsNoTracking().Include(c => c.City).Include(a=>a.VisitedBy).Where(x => x.City.Id == city).GroupBy(x => x.VisitedBy).Select(group => new { VisitedBy = group.Key, Count = group.Count() });
var visitingUsers = groupedUsers.Select(user => user.VisitedBy);
var dif = users.Except(visitingUsers);
However I was trying GroupJoin as below:
var results = _db.Users.Include(c => c.City).Where(c => c.City.Id == city).
GroupJoin(_db.Visits.Include(c => c.City).Include(u => u.VisitedBy), u => u.Id, v => v.VisitedBy.Id, (u, v) => new { User = u , Visits = v })
.Select(o=>o.User);
But this gives me all of the Users, I want the users who don't exist in the Visit set.
Any help?

You may be able to avoid the correlated sub-query in the other answer by actually doing the left join with null check. Here's a quick example:
var A = new [] { new Foo { Bar = 1 }, new Foo { Bar = 2 }};
var B = new [] { new Foo { Bar = 2 }};
var C = from x in A
join y in B on x.Bar equals y.Bar into z
from y in z.DefaultIfEmpty()
where y == null
select x;
Check the emitted SQL...

I am not too sure if the city filtering is what you are after however the following should achieve what you desire:
var visitsToCity = _db.Visits.Where(v => v.City.Id == city);
var usersOfCity = _db.Users.Where(u => u.City.Id == city);
var nonVisitingUsers = usersOfCity.Where(u => !visitsToCity.Any(v => v.VisitedBy == u));
The last Where combined with the Any should result in a SQL statement like:
SELECT * FROM Users u WHERE u.CityId = #p0 AND
NOT EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM Visits v WHERE v.CityId = #p0 AND
v.VisitedById = u.Id)
Where #p0 will be supplied with the value of city.

linq after groupby unable to get column values

I am getting data from multiple tables by joining and i want to group data on particular column value but after group by statement i can access my aliases and their properties. What mistake i am making?
public List<PatientHistory> GetPatientHistory(long prid)
{
using(var db = new bc_limsEntities())
{
List<PatientHistory> result =
(from r in db.dc_tresult
join t in db.dc_tp_test on r.testid equals t.TestId into x
from t in x.DefaultIfEmpty()
join a in db.dc_tp_attributes on r.attributeid equals a.AttributeId into y
from a in y.DefaultIfEmpty()
where r.prid == prid
group new {r,t,a} by new {r.testid} into g
select new PatientHistory
{
resultid = r.resultid,
bookingid = r.bookingid,
testid = r.testid,
prid = r.prid,
attributeid = r.attributeid,
result = r.result,
Test_Name = t.Test_Name,
Attribute_Name = a.Attribute_Name,
enteredon = r.enteredon,
Attribute_Type = a.Attribute_Type
}).ToList();
return result;
}
}

You're doing this wrong way. As been said by Jon after grouping the sequences with aliases r,t,a doesn't exist. After grouping you receive the sequence g with sequances of r,t,a in each element of g. If you want get one object from each group (for example most recent) you should try this:
List<PatientHistory> result =
(from r in db.dc_tresult
join t in db.dc_tp_test on r.testid equals t.TestId into x
from t in x.DefaultIfEmpty()
join a in db.dc_tp_attributes on r.attributeid equals a.AttributeId into y
from a in y.DefaultIfEmpty()
where r.prid == prid
group new {r,t,a} by new {r.testid} into g
select new PatientHistory
{
resultid = g.Select(x => x.r.resultid).Last(), // if you expect single value get it with Single()
// .... here add the rest properties
Attribute_Type = g.Select(x => x.a.Attribute_Type).Last()
}).ToList();

I appreciated this question so I thought I would add another potential usage case. I would like feedback on what the cleanest approach is to getting table information through a group operation so that I can project later in the select operation. I ended up combining what the OP did which is to pass objects into his group clause and then used the g.Select approach suggested by YD1m to get table information out later. I have a LEFT JOIN so I'm defending against nulls :
// SQL Query
//DECLARE #idCamp as Integer = 1
//
//select *,
//(select
//count(idActivityMaster)
//FROM tbActivityMasters
//WHERE dftidActivityCategory = A.idActivityCategory) as masterCount
//FROM tbactivitycategories A
//WHERE idcamp = #idCamp
//ORDER BY CategoryName
int idCamp = 1;
var desiredResult =
(from c in tbActivityCategories
.Where(w => w.idCamp == idCamp)
from m in tbActivityMasters
.Where(m => m.dftidActivityCategory == c.idActivityCategory)
.DefaultIfEmpty() // LEFT OUTER JOIN
where c.idCamp == idCamp
group new {c, m} by new { m.dftidActivityCategory } into g
select new
{
idActivityCategory = g.Select(x => x.m == null ? 0 : x.m.dftidActivityCategory).First(),
idCamp = g.Select(x => x.c.idCamp).First(),
CategoryName = g.Select(x => x.c.CategoryName).First(),
CategoryDescription = g.Select(x => x.c.CategoryDescription).First(),
masterCount = g.Count(x => x.m != null)
}).OrderBy(o=> o.idActivityCategory);
desiredResult.Dump("desiredResult");
If I just use a basic group approach I get the results but not the extra column information. At least I can't find it once I group.
var simpleGroup = (from c in tbActivityCategories
.Where(w => w.idCamp == idCamp)
.OrderBy(o => o.CategoryName)
from m in tbActivityMasters
.Where(m => m.dftidActivityCategory == c.idActivityCategory)
.DefaultIfEmpty() // LEFT OUTER JOIN
where c.idCamp == idCamp
group m by m == null ? 0 : m.dftidActivityCategory into g
select new
{
// How do I best get the extra desired column information from other tables that I had before grouping
// but still have the benefit of the grouping?
// idActivityCategory = g.Select(x => x.m == null ? 0 : x.m.dftidActivityCategory).First(),
// idCamp = g.Select(x => x.c.idCamp).First(),
// CategoryName = g.Select(x => x.c.CategoryName).First(),
// CategoryDescription = g.Select(x => x.c.CategoryDescription).First(),
// masterCount = g.Count(x => x.m != null)
idActivityCategory = g.Key,
masterCount = g.Count(x => x != null)
});
simpleGroup.Dump("simpleGroup");
Please tear this up. I'm trying to learn and it just seems like I'm missing the big picture here. Thanks.
UPDATE : Cleaned up by moving the work into the group and making the select more straight forward. If I had known this yesterday then this would have been my original answer to the OP question.
int idCamp = 1;
var desiredResult =
(from c in tbActivityCategories
.Where(w => w.idCamp == idCamp)
from m in tbActivityMasters
.Where(m => m.dftidActivityCategory == c.idActivityCategory)
.DefaultIfEmpty() // LEFT OUTER JOIN
where c.idCamp == idCamp
group new { c, m } by new
{ idActivityCategory = m == null ? 0 : m.dftidActivityCategory,
idCamp = c.idCamp,
CateGoryName = c.CategoryName,
CategoryDescription = c.CategoryDescription
} into g
select new
{
idActivityCategory = g.Key.idActivityCategory,
idCamp = g.Key.idCamp,
CategoryName = g.Key.CateGoryName,
CategoryDescription = g.Key.CategoryDescription,
masterCount = g.Count(x => x.m != null)
}).OrderBy(o => o.idActivityCategory);
desiredResult.Dump("desiredResult");