Develop Reference

How to reload database with Entity Framework in C#

I am trying to do some checks on my database with an automated process. On a schedule the process goes out to a service and checks all the entries in the database against a list.
I want to re-insert the records that may have been deleted and update ones that are out of date
foreach (Category x in CustomeClass)
{
Category exists = Context.SSActivewear_Category
.Where(b => b.CategoryID == x.CategoryID)
.FirstOrDefault();
if (exists == null)
Context.Add(x);
else
Context.Update(x);
}
Not sure but I keep getting messages about tracking an instance with the same key etc. Can someone point me to a best practice on something like this
Danka!

This type of error is common when re-using the same instance of EF dbContext, especially when trying to load the same entity more then once from database using the same context.
If this is the case, then simply recreate the context (either new it up or use context factory) and then try update or modify your database data.
Creating new context is cheap, so no worries there.
After updating, save changes and dispose of the context (or use it in using statement to begin with).
If you are modifying the same entity multiple times using the same context, then do not load it from database multiple times.
In Your particular code example I would check if there is no duplication of Category objects in CustomeClass collection.
Is there duplication of CategoryID?
Is CategoryID for sure auto-generated when saving data (entity configuration)?
Is code not trying to update multiple entities with same id?
etc.

Entity framework works with references. Two instances of a class with the same data amount to two different references and only one reference can be associated with a DbContext, otherwise you get errors like that.
As per your example below:
foreach (Category x in CustomeClass)
{
Category exists = Context.SSActivewear_Category
.Where(b => b.CategoryID == x.CategoryID)
.FirstOrDefault();
if (exists == null)
Context.Add(x);
else
Context.Update(x);
}
Category is assumed to be your Entity, so "CustomeClass" would be a collection of instances that are not associated with your Context. These are Detached instances.
When your "exists" comes back as #null, this will appear to work as the Category "x" gets added and tracked by the Context. However, when "exists" comes back as not #null, you now have two instances for the same entity. "exists" is tracked by the DbContext, while "x" is not. You cannot use Update() with "x", you must copy the values across.
The simplest way to do this would be Automapper where you can create a map from Category to Category, then use Map to copy all values from "x" over into "exists":
var config = new MapperConfiguration(cfg => cfg.CreateMap<Category, Category>());
var mapper = config.CreateMapper();
mapper.Map(x, exists);
This is purely an example, you'll probably want to configure and inject a mapper that handles your entity copying. You can configure the CreateMap to exclude columns that shouldn't ever change. (Using ForMember, etc.)
Alternatively you can copy the values across manually:
// ...
else
{
exists.Name = x.Name,
exists.SomeValue = x.SomeValue,
// ...
}
In general you should avoid using the Update method in EF as this will result in a statement that overwrites all columns in a table, rather than updating just the column(s) that changes. (If no columns changed then no UPDATE SQL will actually get run)
On another side note, when getting "exists", you should use SingleOrDefault() not FirstOrDefault() as you expect 0 or 1 row back. First* methods should be used in cases where you expect there can be multiple matches but only want the first match, and should always be used with an OrderBy*() method to ensure the results are predictable.
You can use Update by performing an Exists check query that doesn't load a tracked entity. Examples would be:
Category exists = Context.SSActivewear_Category
.AsNoTracking()
.Where(b => b.CategoryID == x.CategoryID)
.SingleOrDefault();
or better:
bool exists = Context.SSActivewear_Category
.Where(b => b.CategoryID == x.CategoryID)
.Any();
Then you could use Context.Update(x). AsNoTracking() tells EF to load an instance but not track it. This would really be a waste in this case as it's a round trip to the DB to return everything in the Category only to check if something was returned or not. The Any() call would be a round trip but just does an EXISTS db query to return true or false.
However, these are not fool-proof as there is no guarantee that the Context instance isn't already tracking an instance for that Category from some other operation. Something as trivial as having a Category appear in CustomeClass twice for any reason would be enough to trip the above examples up as once you call Context.Update(x) that instance is now tracked, so the loop iteration for the second instance would fail.

Entity Framework - Reference not loading

I have a model-first, entity framework design like this (version 4.4)
When I load it using code like this:
PriceSnapshotSummary snapshot = db.PriceSnapshotSummaries.FirstOrDefault(pss => pss.Id == snapshotId);
the snapshot has loaded everything (that is SnapshotPart, Quote, QuoteType), except the DataInfo. Now looking into the SQL this appears to be because Quote has no FK to DataInfo because of the 0..1 relationship.
However, I would have expected that the navigation property 'DataInfo' on Quote would still go off to the database to fetch it.
My current work around is this:
foreach (var quote in snapshot.ComponentQuotes)
{
var dataInfo = db.DataInfoes.FirstOrDefault(di => di.Quote.Id == quote.InstrumentQuote.Id);
quote.InstrumentQuote.DataInfo = dataInfo;
}
Is there a better way to achieve this? I thought EF would automatically load the reference?

This problem has to do with how the basic linq building blocks interact with Entity Framework.
take the following (pseudo)code:
IQueryable<Address> addresses;
Using (var db = new ObjectContext()) {
addresses = db.Users.Addresses.Where(addr => addr.Number > 1000);
}
addresses.Select(addr => Console.WriteLine(addr.City.Name));
This looks OK, but will throw a runtime error, because of an interface called IQueryable.
IQueryable implements IEnumerable and adds info for an expression and a provider. This basically allows it to build and execute sql statements against a database and not have to load whole tables when fetching data and iterating over them like you would over an IEnumerable.
Because linq defers execution of the expression until it's used, it compiles the IQueryable expression into SQL and executes the database query only right before it's needed. This speeds up things a lot, and allows for expression chaining without going to the database every time a Where() or Select() is executed. The side effect is if the object is used outside the scope of db, then the sql statement is executed after db has been disposed of.
To force linq to execute, you can use ToList, like this:
IQueryable<Address> addresses;
Using (var db = new ObjectContext()) {
addresses = db.Users.Addresses.Where(addr => addr.Number > 1000).ToList();
}
addresses.Select(addr => Console.WriteLine(addr.City.Name));
This will force linq to execute the expression against db and get all addresses with number greater than a thousand. this is all good if you need to access a field within the addresses table, but since we want to get the name of a city (a 1..1 relationship similar to yours), we'll hit another bump before it can run: lazy loading.
Entity framework lazy loads entities by default, so nothing is fetched from the database until needed. Again, this speeds things up considerably, since without it every call to the database could potentially bring the whole database into memory; but has the problem of depending on the context being available.
You could set EF to eager load (in your model, go to properties and set 'Lazy Loading Enabled' to False), but that would bring in a lot of info you probably don't use.
The best fix for this problem is to execute everything inside db's scope:
IQueryable<Address> addresses;
Using (var db = new ObjectContext()) {
addresses = db.Users.Addresses.Where(addr => addr.Number > 1000);
addresses.Select(addr => Console.WriteLine(addr.City.Name));
}
I know this is a really simple example but in the real world you can use a DI container like ninject to handle your dependencies and have your db available to you throughout execution of the app.
This leaves us with Include. Include will make IQueryable include all specified relation paths when building the sql statement:
IQueryable<Address> addresses;
Using (var db = new ObjectContext()) {
addresses = db.Users.Addresses.Include("City").Where(addr => addr.Number > 1000).ToList;
}
addresses.Select(addr => Console.WriteLine(addr.City.Name));
This will work, and it's a nice compromise between having to load the whole database and having to refactor an entire project to support DI.
Another thing you can do, is map multiple tables to a single entity. In your case, since the relationship is 1-0..1, you shouldn't have a problem doing it.

How does entity framework access associations?

I have two tables, Kittens and Owners in my Entity Framework model. A Kitten has 1 Owner but an Owner can have many Kittens.
I have a repository method called GetKittens() that returns _context.Kittens.ToList();
Since I set up an association, I can do kitten.Owner.Name.
But since ToList() was already called, and the context disposed of, how does it access the property? When retrieving an Entity, does it do a Join to all tables that have an association?
I have to write a query that pulls data from 4 tables, so I am wondering how to do this efficiently, hence this question trying to understand a bit more about how EF works.

By default, a DbContext will use lazy loading. There is a few options available to you, depending on your use cases.
1- If you have control over the lifetime of your DbContext, do not dispose it. However, every time you will access a related entity (for the first time), a new query will be sent to the database to fetch it.
2- Eagerly include the related entity by use Include on the IQueryable<Kitten>:
// For imagine context is the DbContext for your EF Model
context.Kittens.Include(c => c.Owners); // Or Include("Owners")
However, if you have no control over your repository, you have no option but to call a related method of your repository (like IEnumerable<Owner> GetOwners(Kitten kitten)) since the repository already returns the list.
If you do, consider either eagerly include the Kitten's owners in the repository before materializing with ToList() or return an IQuerable and leave the responsibility to the calling class to include related entities or customizing the query. If you do not want a caller to be able to alter the query, you can add an overload with includes that could be something along the line of:
public List<Kitten> GetKittens(params string[] includes)
{
return includes.Aggregate(
context.Kittens.AsQueryable(),
(query, include) => return query.Include(include)).ToList();
}
All in all, this is an implementation decision that you will have to take.

Entity Framework Code First - select based on type of child TPH class

I am currently working with Entity Framework 4 on a project that is using Table Per Hierarchy to represent one set of classes using a single table. The way this works is that this table represents states and different states are associated with different other classes.
So you might imagine it to look like this, ignoring the common fields all states share:
InactiveState
has a -> StateStore
ActiveState
has a -> ActivityLocation
CompletedState
has a -> CompletionDate
Each state has a collection of all the InventoryItems that belong to it.
Now each item in my inventory has many states, where the last one in the history is the current state. To save on lists I have a shortcut field that points to the current state of my Inventory:
public class InventoryItem : Entity
{
// whole bunch of other properties
public virtual ICollection<InventoryState> StateHistory { get; set; }
public virtual InventoryState LastState { get; set; }
}
The first problem I am having is when I want to find, for example, all the InventoryItems which are in the Active state.
It turns out Linq-To-Entities doesn't support GetType() so I can't use a statement like InventoryRepository.Get().Where( x => x.LastState.GetType() == someType ). I can use the is operator, but that requires a fixed type so rather than being able to have a method like this:
public ICollection<InventoryItem> GetInventoryItemsByState( Type state )
{
return inventoryRepository.Get().Where( x => x.LastState is state );
}
I have to run some kind of if statement based on the type before I make the Linq query, which feels wrong. The InventoryItem list is likely to get large, so I need to do this at the EF level, I can't pull the whole list into memory and use GetType(), for example.
I have two questions in this situation, connected closely enough that I think they can be combined as they probably reflect a lack of understanding on my part:
Is it possible to find a list of items that share a child table type using Linq To Entities?
Given that I am not using Lazy Loading, is it possible to Include related items for child table types using TPH so that, for example, if I have an InactiveState as the child of my InventoryItem I can preload the StateStore for that InactiveState?

Is it possible to find a list of items that share a child table type
using Linq To Entities?
I don't think it's possible in another way than using an if/switch that checks for the type and builds a filter expression using is T or OfType<T>. You could encapsulate this logic into an extension method for example to have a single place to maintain and a reusable method:
public static class Extensions
{
public static IQueryable<InventoryItem> WhereIsLastState(
this IQueryable<InventoryItem> query, Type state)
{
if (state == typeof(InactiveState))
return query.Where(i => i.LastState is InactiveState);
if (state == typeof(ActiveState))
return query.Where(i => i.LastState is ActiveState);
if (state == typeof(CompletedState))
return query.Where(i => i.LastState is CompletedState);
throw new InvalidOperationException("Unsupported type...");
}
}
To be used like this:
public ICollection<InventoryItem> GetInventoryItemsByState(Type state)
{
return inventoryRepository.Get().WhereIsLastState(state).ToList();
}
I don't know if it would be possible to build the i => i.LastState is XXX expression manually using the .NET Expression API and based on the Type passed into the method. (Would interest me too, to be honest, but I have almost no clue about expression manipulation to answer that myself.)
Given that I am not using Lazy Loading, is it possible to Include
related items for child table types using TPH so that, for example, if
I have an InactiveState as the child of my InventoryItem I can preload
the StateStore for that InactiveState?
I am not sure if I understand that correctly but generally eager loading with Include does not support any filtering or additional operations on specific included children.
One way to circumvent this limitation and still get the result in a single database roundtrip is using a projection which would look like this:
var result = context.InventoryItems
.Select(i => new
{
InventoryItem = i,
LastState = i.LastState,
StateStore = (i.LastState is InactiveState)
? (i.LastState as InactiveState).StateStore
: null
})
.AsEnumerable()
.Select(x => x.InventoryItem)
.ToList();
If the query is a tracked query (which it is in the example above) and the relationships are not many-to-many (they are not in your example) the context will fixup the relationships when the entities are loaded into the context, that is InventoryItem.LastState and InventoryItem.LastState.StateStore (if LastState is of type InactiveState) will be set to the loaded entities (as if they had been loaded with eager loading).

Entity Framework - Eager loading of subclass related objects

I wonder if there is a possibility to eager load related entities for certain subclass of given class.
Class structure is below
Order has relation to many base suborder classes (SuborderBase). MySubOrder class inherits from SuborderBase. I want to specify path for Include() to load MySubOrder related entities (Customer) when loading Order, but I got an error claiming that there is no relation between SuborderBase and Customer. But relation exists between MySubOrder and Customer.
Below is query that fails
Context.Orders.Include("SubOrderBases").Include("SubOrderBases.Customers")
How can I specify that explicitly?
Update. Entity scheme is below

This is a solution which requires only a single roundtrip:
var orders = Context.Orders
.Select(o => new
{
Order = o,
SubOrderBases = o.SubOrderBases.Where(s => !(s is MyOrder)),
MyOrdersWithCustomers = o.SubOrderBases.OfType<MyOrder>()
.Select(m => new
{
MyOrder = m,
Customers = m.Customers
})
})
.ToList() // <- query is executed here, the rest happens in memory
.Select(a =>
{
a.Order.SubOrderBases = new List<SubOrderBase>(
a.SubOrderBases.Concat(
a.MyOrdersWithCustomers.Select(m =>
{
m.MyOrder.Customers = m.Customers;
return m.MyOrder;
})));
return a.Order;
})
.ToList();
It is basically a projection into an anonymous type collection. Afterwards the query result is transformed into entities and navigation properties in memory. (It also works with disabled tracking.)
If you don't need entities you can omit the whole part after the first ToList() and work directly with the result in the anonymous objects.
If you must modify this object graph and need change tracking, I am not sure if this approach is safe because the navigation properties are not completely set when the data are loaded - for example MyOrder.Customers is null after the projection and then setting relationship properties in memory could be detected as a modification which it isn't and cause trouble when you call SaveChanges.
Projections are made for readonly scenarios, not for modifications. If you need change tracking the probably safer way is to load full entities in multiple roundtrips as there is no way to use Include in a single roundtrip to load the whole object graph in your situation.

Suppose u loaded the orders list as lstOrders, try this:
foreach (Orders order in lstOrders)
order.SubOrderBases.Load();
and the same for the customers..