LINQ deferred (or immediate?) execution - c#

Given the following query:
List<GetMultipleLookupListsOutput> data = await _masterListTranslationsRepository
.GetAll() //<- it returns IQueriable
.GroupBy(q => q.ListLabelID)
.Select(q => q
.OrderByDescending(w=>w.ISOLanguageCode == isoLanguageCode)
.ThenByDescending(w=>w.ISOLanguageCode == "en-US"))
.Select(q => q.FirstOrDefault()) // DB call ?
.GroupBy(q=>q.ListLabels.Lists.ListName)
.Select(q => new GetMultipleLookupListsOutput
{
ListName = q.Key,
LookupLists = q
.OrderByDescending(w => w.ISOLanguageCode == isoLanguageCode)
.ThenByDescending(w => w.ISOLanguageCode == "en-US")
.Select(w => new RegionalFeatureDto
{
Id = w.Id,
Label = w.BaseValue
})
.ToList() // DB call ?
})
.ToListAsync();
How many database calls will it generate ?
GetAll() method returns IQueryable, but does FirstOrDefault() and ToList() in second and third select statements will trigger database call ?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

If you are concerned with generating multiple calls I would consider using EntityFramework Extensions
You can batch queries together by adding .Future() to the end of a query
Example:
db.BlogPosts.Where(x => x.Category.Any(y => y.Name.Contains("EntityFramework"))).Future();
So to answer your question you could combine these into one call to the database.
To check the SQL/batching you can also include this before your query:
db.Database.Log = s => System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine($"SQL: {s}");
and the log will be displayed in your output window.

Related

LINQ efficiency

Consider the following LINQ statements:
var model = getModel();
// apptId is passed in, not the order, so get the related order id
var order = (model.getMyData
.Where(x => x.ApptId == apptId)
.Select(y => y.OrderId));
var orderId = 0;
var orderId = order.LastOrDefault();
// see if more than one appt is associated to the order
var apptOrders = (model.getMyData
.Where(x => x.OrderId == orderId)
.Select(y => new { y.OrderId, y.AppointmentsId }));
This code works as expected, but I could not help but think that there is a more efficient way to accomplish the goal ( one call to the db ).
Is there a way to combine the two LINQ statements above into one? For this question please assume I need to use LINQ.
You can use GroupBy method to group all orders by OrderId. After applying LastOrDefault and ToList will give you the same result which you get from above code.
Here is a sample code:
var apptOrders = model.getMyData
.Where(x => x.ApptId == apptId)
.GroupBy(s => s.OrderId)
.LastOrDefault().ToList();
Entity Framework can't translate LastOrDefault, but it can handle Contains with sub-queries, so lookup the OrderId as a query and filter the orders by that:
// apptId is passed in, not the order, so get the related order id
var orderId = model.getMyData
.Where(x => x.ApptId == apptId)
.Select(y => y.OrderId);
// see if more than one appt is associated to the order
var apptOrders = model.getMyData
.Where(a => orderId.Contains(a.OrderId))
.Select(a => a.ApptId);
It seems like this is all you need:
var apptOrders =
model
.getMyData
.Where(x => x.ApptId == apptId)
.Select(y => new { y.OrderId, y.AppointmentsId });

Problem with LINQ query: Select first task from each goal

I'm looking for suggestions on how to write a query. For each Goal, I want to select the first Task (sorted by Task.Sequence), in addition to any tasks with ShowAlways == true. (My actual query is more complex, but this query demonstrates the limitations I'm running into.)
I tried something like this:
var tasks = (from a in DbContext.Areas
from g in a.Goals
from t in g.Tasks
let nextTaskId = g.Tasks.OrderBy(tt => tt.Sequence).Select(tt => tt.Id).DefaultIfEmpty(-1).FirstOrDefault()
where t.ShowAlways || t.Id == nextTaskId
select new CalendarTask
{
// Member assignment
}).ToList();
But this query appears to be too complex.
System.InvalidOperationException: 'Processing of the LINQ expression 'OrderBy<Task, int>(
source: MaterializeCollectionNavigation(Navigation: Goal.Tasks(< Tasks > k__BackingField, DbSet<Task>) Collection ToDependent Task Inverse: Goal, Where<Task>(
source: NavigationExpansionExpression
Source: Where<Task>(
source: DbSet<Task>,
predicate: (t0) => Property<Nullable<int>>((Unhandled parameter: ti0).Outer.Inner, "Id") == Property<Nullable<int>>(t0, "GoalId"))
PendingSelector: (t0) => NavigationTreeExpression
Value: EntityReferenceTask
Expression: t0
,
predicate: (i) => Property<Nullable<int>>(NavigationTreeExpression
Value: EntityReferenceGoal
Expression: (Unhandled parameter: ti0).Outer.Inner, "Id") == Property<Nullable<int>>(i, "GoalId"))),
keySelector: (tt) => tt.Sequence)' by 'NavigationExpandingExpressionVisitor' failed. This may indicate either a bug or a limitation in EF Core. See https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=2101433 for more detailed information.'
The problem is the line let nextTaskId =.... If I comment out that, there is no error. (But I don't get what I'm after.)
I'll readily admit that I don't understand the details of the error message. About the only other way I can think of to approach this is return all the Tasks and then sort and filter them on the client. But my preference is not to retrieve data I don't need.
Can anyone see any other ways to approach this query?
Note: I'm using the very latest version of Visual Studio and .NET.
UPDATE:
I tried a different, but less efficient approach to this query.
var tasks = (DbContext.Areas
.Where(a => a.UserId == UserManager.GetUserId(User) && !a.OnHold)
.SelectMany(a => a.Goals)
.Where(g => !g.OnHold)
.Select(g => g.Tasks.Where(tt => !tt.OnHold && !tt.Completed).OrderBy(tt => tt.Sequence).FirstOrDefault()))
.Union(DbContext.Areas
.Where(a => a.UserId == UserManager.GetUserId(User) && !a.OnHold)
.SelectMany(a => a.Goals)
.Where(g => !g.OnHold)
.Select(g => g.Tasks.Where(tt => !tt.OnHold && !tt.Completed && (tt.DueDate.HasValue || tt.AlwaysShow)).OrderBy(tt => tt.Sequence).FirstOrDefault()))
.Distinct()
.Select(t => new CalendarTask
{
Id = t.Id,
Title = t.Title,
Goal = t.Goal.Title,
CssClass = t.Goal.Area.CssClass,
DueDate = t.DueDate,
Completed = t.Completed
});
But this also produced an error:
System.InvalidOperationException: 'Processing of the LINQ expression 'Where<Task>(
source: MaterializeCollectionNavigation(Navigation: Goal.Tasks (<Tasks>k__BackingField, DbSet<Task>) Collection ToDependent Task Inverse: Goal, Where<Task>(
source: NavigationExpansionExpression
Source: Where<Task>(
source: DbSet<Task>,
predicate: (t) => Property<Nullable<int>>((Unhandled parameter: ti).Inner, "Id") == Property<Nullable<int>>(t, "GoalId"))
PendingSelector: (t) => NavigationTreeExpression
Value: EntityReferenceTask
Expression: t
,
predicate: (i) => Property<Nullable<int>>(NavigationTreeExpression
Value: EntityReferenceGoal
Expression: (Unhandled parameter: ti).Inner, "Id") == Property<Nullable<int>>(i, "GoalId"))),
predicate: (tt) => !(tt.OnHold) && !(tt.Completed))' by 'NavigationExpandingExpressionVisitor' failed. This may indicate either a bug or a limitation in EF Core. See https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=2101433 for more detailed information.'
This is a good example for the need of full reproducible example. When trying to reproduce the issue with similar entity models, I was either getting a different error about DefaulIfEmpty(-1) (apparently not supported, don't forget to remove it - the SQL query will work correctly w/o it) or no error when removing it.
Then I noticed a small deeply hidden difference in your error messages compared to mine, which led me to the cause of the problem:
MaterializeCollectionNavigation(Navigation: Goal.Tasks (<Tasks>k__BackingField, DbSet<Task>)
specifically the DbSet<Task> at the end (in my case it was ICollection<Task>). I realized that you used DbSet<T> type for collection navigation property rather than the usual ICollection<T>, IEnumerable<T>, List<T> etc., e.g.
public class Goal
{
// ...
public DbSet<Task> Tasks { get; set; }
}
Simply don't do that. DbSet<T> is a special EF Core class, supposed to be used only from DbContext to represent db table, view or raw SQL query result set. And more importantly, DbSets are the only real EF Core query roots, so it's not surprising that such usage confuses the EF Core query translator.
So change it to some of the supported interfaces/classes (for instance, ICollection<Task>) and the original problem will be solved.
Then removing the DefaultIfEmpty(-1) will allow successfully translating the first query in question.
I don't have EF Core up and running, but are you able to split it up like this?
var allTasks = DbContext.Areas
.SelectMany(a => a.Goals)
.SelectMany(a => a.Tasks);
var always = allTasks.Where(t => t.ShowAlways);
var next = allTasks
.OrderBy(tt => tt.Sequence)
.Take(1);
var result = always
.Concat(next)
.Select(t => new
{
// Member assignment
})
.ToList();
Edit: Sorry, I'm not great with query syntax, maybe this does what you need?
var allGoals = DbContext.Areas
.SelectMany(a => a.Goals);
var allTasks = DbContext.Areas
.SelectMany(a => a.Goals)
.SelectMany(a => a.Tasks);
var always = allGoals
.SelectMany(a => a.Tasks)
.Where(t => t.ShowAlways);
var nextTasks = allGoals
.SelectMany(g => g.Tasks.OrderBy(tt => tt.Sequence).Take(1));
var result = always
.Concat(nextTasks)
.Select(t => new
{
// Member assignment
})
.ToList();
I would recommend you start by breaking up this query into individual parts. Try iterating through the Goals in a foreach with your Task logic inside. Add each new CalendarTask to a List that you defined ahead of time.
Overall breaking this logic up and experimenting a bit will probably lead you to some insight with the limitations of Entity Framework Core.
I think we might separate the query into two steps. First, query each goals and get the min Sequence task and store them(maybe with a anonymous type like {NextTaskId,Goal}). Then, we query the temp data and get the result. For example
Areas.SelectMany(x=>x.Goals)
.Select(g=>new {
NextTaskId=g.Tasks.OrderBy(t=>t.Sequence).FirstOrDefault()?.Id,
Tasks=g.Tasks.Where(t=>t.ShowAlways)
})
.SelectMany(a=>a.Tasks,(a,task)=>new {
NextTaskId = a.NextTaskId,
Task = task
});
I tried to create the linq request but I'm not sure about the result
var tasks = ( from a in DbContext.Areas
from g in a.Goals
from t in g.Tasks
join oneTask in (from t in DbContext.Tasks
group t by t.Id into gt
select new {
Id = gt.Key,
Sequence = gt.Min(t => t.Sequence)
}) on new { t.Id, t.Sequence } equals new { oneTask.Id,oneTask.Sequence }
select new {Area = a, Goal = g, Task = t})
.Union(
from a in DbContext.Areas
from g in a.Goals
from t in g.Tasks
where t.ShowAlways
select new {Area = a, Goal = g, Task = t});
I currently don't have EF Core, but do you really need to compare this much?
Wouldn't querying the tasks be sufficient?
If there is a navigation property or foreign key defined I could imaging using something like this:
Tasks.Where(task => task.Sequence == Tasks.Where(t => t.GoalIdentity == task.GoalIdentity).Min(t => t.Sequence) || task.ShowAlways);

Flattening Complex LINQ to SQL

I have a somewhat complex LINQ to SQL query that I'm trying to optimise (no, not prematurely, things are slow), that goes a little bit like this;
IQueryable<SearchListItem> query = DbContext.EquipmentLives
.Where(...)
.Select(e => new SearchListItem {
EquipmentStatusId = e.EquipmentStatuses.FirstOrDefault(s => s.DateTo == null).Id,
StatusStartDate = e.EquipmentStatuses.FirstOrDefault(s => s.DateTo == null).DateFrom,
...
});
The where clauses aren't important, they don't filter EquipmentStatuses, happy to include if someone thinks they're required.
This is on quite a large set of tables and returns a fairly details object, there's more references to EquipmentStatuses, but I'm sure you get the idea. The problem is that there's quite obviously two sub-queries and I'm sure that (among some other things) is not ideal, especially since they are exactly the same sub-query each time.
Is it possible to flatten this out a bit? Perhaps it's easier to do a few smaller queries to the database and create the SearchListItem in a foreach loop?
Here's my take given your comments, and with some assumptions I've made
It may look scary, but give it a try, with and without the ToList() before the GroupBy()
If you have LinqPad, check the SQL produced, and the number of queries, or just plug in the SQL Server Profiler
With LinqPad you could even put a Stopwatch to measure things precisely
Enjoy ;)
var query = DbContext.EquipmentLives
.AsNoTracking() // Notice this!!!
.Where(...)
// WARNING: SelectMany is an INNER JOIN
// You won't get EquipmentLive records that don't have EquipmentStatuses
// But your original code would break if such a case existed
.SelectMany(e => e.EquipmentStatuses, (live, status) => new
{
EquipmentLiveId = live.Id, // We'll need this one for grouping
EquipmentStatusId = status.Id,
EquipmentStatusDateTo = status.DateTo,
StatusStartDate = status.DateFrom
//...
})
// WARNING: Again, you won't get EquipmentLive records for which none of their EquipmentStatuses have a DateTo == null
// But your original code would break if such a case existed
.Where(x => x.EquipmentStatusDateTo == null)
// Now You can do a ToList() before the following GroupBy(). It depends on a lot of factors...
// If you only expect one or two EquipmentStatus.DateTo == null per EquipmentLive, doing ToList() before GroupBy may give you a performance boost
// Why? GroupBy sometimes confuses the EF SQL generator and the SQL Optimizer
.GroupBy(x => x.EquipmentLiveId, x => new SearchListItem
{
EquipmentLiveId = x.EquipmentLiveId, // You may or may not need this?
EquipmentStatusId = x.EquipmentStatusId,
StatusStartDate = x.StatusStartDate,
//...
})
// Now you have one group of SearchListItem per EquipmentLive
// Each group has a list of EquipmenStatuses with DateTo == null
// Just select the first one (you could do g.OrderBy... as well)
.Select(g => g.FirstOrDefault())
// Materialize
.ToList();
You don't need to repeat the FirstOrDefault. You can add an intermediate Select to select it once and then reuse it:
IQueryable<SearchListItem> query = DbContext.EquipmentLives
.Where(...)
.Select(e => e.EquipmentStatuses.FirstOrDefault(s => s.DateTo == null))
.Select(s => new SearchListItem {
EquipmentStatusId = s.Id,
StatusStartDate = s.DateFrom,
...
});
In query syntax (which I find more readable) it would look like this:
var query =
from e in DbContext.EquipmentLives
where ...
let s = e.EquipmentStatuses.FirstOrDefault(s => s.DateTo == null)
select new SearchListItem {
EquipmentStatusId = s.Id,
StatusStartDate = s.DateFrom,
...
});
There is another problem in your query though. If there is no matching EquipmentStatus in your EquipmentLive, FirstOrDefault will return null, which will cause an exception in the last select. So you might need an additional Where:
IQueryable<SearchListItem> query = DbContext.EquipmentLives
.Where(...)
.Select(e => e.EquipmentStatuses.FirstOrDefault(s => s.DateTo == null))
.Where(s => s != null)
.Select(s => new SearchListItem {
EquipmentStatusId = s.Id,
StatusStartDate = s.DateFrom,
...
});
or
var query =
from e in DbContext.EquipmentLives
where ...
let s = e.EquipmentStatuses.FirstOrDefault(s => s.DateTo == null)
where s != null
select new SearchListItem {
EquipmentStatusId = s.Id,
StatusStartDate = s.DateFrom,
...
});
Given that you don't test for null after calling FirstOrDefault(s => s.DateTo == null) I assume that:
either for each device there is always a status with DateTo == null or
you need to see only devices which have such status
In order to do so you need to join EquipmentLives with EquipmentStatuses to avoid subqueries:
var query = DbContext.EquipmentLives
.Where(l => true)
.Join(DbContext.EquipmentStatuses.Where(s => s.DateTo == null),
eq => eq.Id,
status => status.EquipmentId,
(eq, status) => new SelectListItem
{
EquipmentStatusId = status.Id,
StatusStartDate = status.DateFrom
});
However, if you do want to perform a left join replace DbContext.EquipmentStatuses.Where(s => s.DateTo == null) with DbContext.EquipmentStatuses.Where(s => s.DateTo == null).DefaultIfEmpty().

Refactor Linq query

I am trying to cut this linq down
var sys = db.tlkpSystems
.Where(a => db.tlkpSettings.Where(e => e.Hidden < 3)
.Select(o => o.System)
.ToList().Contains(a.System)) //cannot get this part in?
.OrderBy(a => a.SystemName).ToList();
foreach (var item in sys)
model.Add(new SettingSystem {
System = item.System,
SystemName = item.SystemName
});
I have tried the following:
List<SettingSystem> model = new List<SettingSystem>();
model = db.tlkpSettings.Where(e => e.Hidden < 3)
.OrderBy(e => e.Setting)
.Select(e => new SettingSystem
{
System = e.System,
SystemName = e.Setting
}).ToList();
How can I call the .Contains(a.System) part in my query?
Thanks
Some general rules when working with LINQ to Entities:
Avoid using ToList inside the query. It prevents EF to build a correct SQL query.
Don't use Contains when working with entities (tables). Use Any or joins.
Here is your query (in case System is not an entity navigation property):
var sys = db.tlkpSystems
.Where(a => db.tlkpSettings.Any(e => e.Hidden < 3 && e.System == a.System))
.OrderBy(a => a.SystemName).ToList();
As an addendum, there is also AsEnumerable for when you must pull a query into memory (such as calling methods within another clause). This is generally better than ToList or ToArray since it'll enumerate the query, rather than enumerating, putting together a List/Array, and then enumerating that collection.

Join several queries to optimise QueryOver query

I am using NHibernate and while traversing my code I came upon two functions that are called in sequence. They are probably a school example of 1) extra database round trip and 2) in-memory processing at the application side. The code involved is:
// 1) Getting the surveys in advance
var surveys = DatabaseServices.Session.QueryOver<Survey>()
.Where(x => x.AboutCompany.IsIn(companyAccounts.ToList()))
// Actual query that can be optimized
var unverifiedSurveys = DatabaseServices.Session.QueryOver<QuestionInSurvey>()
.Where(x => x.Survey.IsIn(surveys.ToList()))
.And(x => x.ApprovalStatus == status)
.List();
// 2) In-memory processing
return unverifiedSurveys.Select(x => x.Survey).Distinct()
.OrderByDescending(m => m.CreatedOn).ToList();
I have read that the actual Distinct() operation with the QueryOver API can be done using 1 .TransformUsing(Transformers.DistinctRootEntity)
Could anyone give an example how the queries can be combined thus having one round trip to the database and no application-side processing?
The most suitable way in this scenario is to use Subselect. We will firstly create the detached query (which will be executed as a part of main query)
Survey survey = null;
QueryOver<Survey> surveys = QueryOver.Of<Survey>(() => survey)
.Where(() => survey.AboutCompany.IsIn(companyAccounts.ToList()))
.Select(Projections.Distinct(Projections.Property(() => survey.ID)));
So, what we have now is a statement, which will return the inner select. Now the main query:
QuestionInSurvey question = null;
var query = session.QueryOver<QuestionInSurvey>(() => question)
.WithSubquery
.WhereProperty(() => qeustion.Survey.ID)
.In(subQuery) // here we will fitler the results
.And(() => question.ApprovalStatus == status)
.List();
And what we get is the:
SELECT ...
FROM QuestionInSurvey
WHERE SurveyId IN (SELECT SurveyID FROM Survey ...)
So, in one trip to DB we will recieve all the data, which will be completely filtered on DB side... so we are provided with "distinct" set of values, which could be even paged (Take(), Skip())
This might be something like this, which requires a distinct projection of all properties of Survey. I guess there is a better solution, but can not get to it ;-) Hope this will help anyway.
Survey surveyAlias = null;
var result =
session.QueryOver<QuestionInSurvey>()
.JoinAlias(x => x.Survey, () => surveyAlias)
.WhereRestrictionOn(() => surveyAlias.AboutCompany).IsIn(companyAccounts.ToList())
.And(x => x.ApprovalStatus == status)
.Select(
Projections.Distinct(
Projections.ProjectionList()
.Add(Projections.Property(() => surveyAlias.Id))
.Add(Projections.Property(() => surveyAlias.AboutCompany))
.Add(Projections.Property(() => surveyAlias.CreatedOn))
)
)
.OrderBy(Projections.Property(() => surveyAlias.CreatedOn)).Desc
.TransformUsing(Transformers.AliasToBean<Survey>())
.List<Survey>();

Categories

Resources