Develop Reference

How to get records from tables in custom order of ids?

I have some Ids store in below variable:
List<int> Ids;
Now I want to get records based on above Ids but with same order as it is in above Ids.
For eg: Records are like this in database:
Employee:
Id
1
2
3
4
5
Now if Ids array holds Ids like this : 4,2,5,3,1 then I am trying to get records in this order order only:
Query:
var data = context.Employee.Where(t => Ids.Contains(t.Id)).ToList();
But above query is giving me output like it is in table:
Id
1
2
3
4
5
Expected output :
Id
4
2
5
3
1
Update:I have already tried this below solution but as this is entity framework it didn't work out:
var data = context.Employee.Where(t => Ids.Contains(t.Id))
.OrderBy(d => Ids.IndexOf(d.Id)).ToList();
For above solution to make it working I have to add to list :
var data = context.Employee.Where(t => Ids.Contains(t.Id)).ToList()
.OrderBy(d => Ids.IndexOf(d.Id)).ToList();
But I don't want to load data in memory and then filter out my record.

Since the order in which the data is returned when you do not specify an ORDER BY is not determined, you have to add an ORDER BY to indicate how you want it sorted. Unfortunately you have to order based on objects/values in-memory, and cannot use that to order in your SQL query.
Therefore, the best you can do is to order in-memory once the data is retrieved from the database.
var data = context.Employee
// Add a criteria that we only want the known ids
.Where(t => Ids.Contains(t.Id))
// Anything after this is done in-memory instead of by the database
.AsEnumerable()
// Sort the results, in-memory
.OrderBy(d => Ids.IndexOf(d.Id))
// Materialize into a list
.ToList();

Without stored procedures you can use Union and ?: that are both canonical functions.
I can't immagine other ways.
?:
You can use it to assign a weigth to each id value then order by the weigth. Also, you have to generate ?: using dynamic linq.
What is the equivalent of "CASE WHEN THEN" (T-SQL) with Entity Framework?
Dynamically generate LINQ queries
Union
I think this is the more simple way to obtain it. In this case you can add a Where/Union for each Id.
EDIT 1
About using Union you can use code similar to this
IQueryable<Foo> query = context.Foos.AsQueryable();
List<int> Ids = new List<int>();
Ids.AddRange(new[] {3,2,1});
bool first = true;
foreach (int id in Ids)
{
if (first)
{
query = query.Where(_ => _.FooId == id);
first = false;
}
else
{
query = query.Union(context.Foos.Where(_ => _.FooId == id));
}
}
var results = query.ToList();
This generate the followiong query
SELECT
[Distinct2].[C1] AS [C1]
FROM ( SELECT DISTINCT
[UnionAll2].[C1] AS [C1]
FROM (SELECT
[Distinct1].[C1] AS [C1]
FROM ( SELECT DISTINCT
[UnionAll1].[FooId] AS [C1]
FROM (SELECT
[Extent1].[FooId] AS [FooId]
FROM [Foos] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[FooId] = #p__linq__0
UNION ALL
SELECT
[Extent2].[FooId] AS [FooId]
FROM [Foos] AS [Extent2]
WHERE [Extent2].[FooId] = #p__linq__1) AS [UnionAll1]
) AS [Distinct1]
UNION ALL
SELECT
[Extent3].[FooId] AS [FooId]
FROM [Foos] AS [Extent3]
WHERE [Extent3].[FooId] = #p__linq__2) AS [UnionAll2]
) AS [Distinct2]
p__linq__0 = 3
p__linq__1 = 2
p__linq__2 = 1
EDIT 2
I think the best approach is in memory approach because it has the same network load, EF does not generate the ugly query that could not work on databases different from SQL Server and code is more readable. In your particular application could be that union/where is better. So, generally I would suggest you to try memory approach then, if you have [performance] issues, you can check if union/where is better.

LINQ left outer join query error: OuterApply did not have the appropriate keys

I am doing a join on two SQL functions using Entity Framework as my ORM. When the query gets executed I get this error message:
The query attempted to call 'Outer Apply' over a nested query,
but 'OuterApply' did not have the appropriate keys
This is my query:
var ingredientAllergenData = (from ings in db.fnListIngredientsFromItem(productId, (short)itemType, productId)
join ingAllergens in db.fnListAllergensFromItems(productId.ToString(CultureInfo.InvariantCulture), (short)itemType, currentLang)
on ings.id equals ingAllergens.ingredientId into ingAllergensData
from allergens in ingAllergensData.DefaultIfEmpty()
where ings.table == "tblIng" || ings.table == ""
select new {ings, allergens}).ToList();
I wrote the same query in LINQPad and I got back results, so I'm not sure what the issue is:
var ingredientAllergenData = (from ings in fnListIngredientsFromItem(1232, 0, 1232)
join ingAllergens in fnListAllergensFromItems("1232", 0, 1)
on ings.Id equals ingAllergens.IngredientId into ingAllergensData
from allergens in ingAllergensData.DefaultIfEmpty()
where ings.Table == "tblIng" || ings.Table == ""
select new {ings, allergens}).ToList();
The response from linqpad:
EDIT
This is the generated SQL query in LINQPad:
-- Region Parameters
DECLARE #p0 Int = 1232
DECLARE #p1 Int = 0
DECLARE #p2 Int = 1232
DECLARE #p3 VarChar(1000) = '1232'
DECLARE #p4 SmallInt = 0
DECLARE #p5 Int = 1
DECLARE #p6 VarChar(1000) = 'tblIng'
DECLARE #p7 VarChar(1000) = ''
-- EndRegion
SELECT [t0].[prodId] AS [ProdId], [t0].[id] AS [Id], [t0].[parent] AS [Parent], [t0].[name] AS [Name], [t0].[ing_gtin] AS [Ing_gtin], [t0].[ing_artsup] AS [Ing_artsup], [t0].[table] AS [Table], [t0].[quantity] AS [Quantity], [t2].[test], [t2].[prodId] AS [ProdId2], [t2].[ingredientId] AS [IngredientId], [t2].[allergenId] AS [AllergenId], [t2].[allergenName] AS [AllergenName], [t2].[level_of_containment] AS [Level_of_containment]
FROM [dbo].[fnListIngredientsFromItem](#p0, #p1, #p2) AS [t0]
LEFT OUTER JOIN (
SELECT 1 AS [test], [t1].[prodId], [t1].[ingredientId], [t1].[allergenId], [t1].[allergenName], [t1].[level_of_containment]
FROM [dbo].[fnListAllergensFromItems](#p3, #p4, #p5) AS [t1]
) AS [t2] ON [t0].[id] = ([t2].[ingredientId])
WHERE ([t0].[table] = #p6) OR ([t0].[table] = #p7)
I also tried hardcoding the same numbers into C# and got the same error again.

The problem is that Entity Framework needs to know what the primary key columns of the TVF results are to do a left join, and the default generated EDMX file does not contain that information. You can add the key value information by mapping the TVF results to an entity (instead of the default of mapping to a complex type).
The reason the same query works in LINQPad is that the default Data Context driver for connecting to a database in LINQPad uses LINQ to SQL (not Entity Framework). But I was able to get the query to run in Entity Framework (eventually).
I set up a local SQL Server database similar table-valued functions:
CREATE FUNCTION fnListIngredientsFromItem(#prodId int, #itemType1 smallint, #parent int)
RETURNS TABLE
AS
RETURN (
select prodId = 1232, id = 1827, parent = 1232, name = 'Ossenhaaspunten', ing_gtin = 3003210089821, ing_artsup=141020, [table] = 'tblIng', quantity = '2 K'
);
go
CREATE FUNCTION fnListAllergensFromItems(#prodIdString varchar(1000), #itemType2 smallint, #lang int)
RETURNS TABLE
AS
RETURN (
select prodId = '1232', ingredientId = 1827, allergenId = 11, allergenName = 'fish', level_of_containment = 2
union all
select prodId = '1232', ingredientId = 1827, allergenId = 16, allergenName = 'tree nuts', level_of_containment = 2
union all
select prodId = '1232', ingredientId = 1827, allergenId = 12, allergenName = 'crustacean and shellfish', level_of_containment = 2
);
go
And I created a test project using Entity Framework 6.1.2 and generated an EDMX file from the database using the Entity Data Model Designer in Visual Studio 2013. With this setup, I was able to get the same error when trying to run that query:
System.NotSupportedException
HResult=-2146233067
Message=The query attempted to call 'OuterApply' over a nested query, but 'OuterApply' did not have the appropriate keys.
Source=EntityFramework
StackTrace:
at System.Data.Entity.Core.Query.PlanCompiler.NestPullup.ApplyOpJoinOp(Op op, Node n)
at System.Data.Entity.Core.Query.PlanCompiler.NestPullup.VisitApplyOp(ApplyBaseOp op, Node n)
at System.Data.Entity.Core.Query.InternalTrees.BasicOpVisitorOfT`1.Visit(OuterApplyOp op, Node n)
...
Running an alternate expression for a left join resulted in a slightly different error:
var ingredientAllergenData = (db.fnListIngredientsFromItem(1323, (short)0, 1)
.GroupJoin(db.fnListAllergensFromItems("1232", 0, 1),
ing => ing.id,
allergen => allergen.ingredientId,
(ing, allergen) => new { ing, allergen }
)
).ToList();
Here is a truncated stacktrace from the new exception:
System.NotSupportedException
HResult=-2146233067
Message=The nested query does not have the appropriate keys.
Source=EntityFramework
StackTrace:
at System.Data.Entity.Core.Query.PlanCompiler.NestPullup.ConvertToSingleStreamNest(Node nestNode, Dictionary`2 varRefReplacementMap, VarList flattenedOutputVarList, SimpleColumnMap[]& parentKeyColumnMaps)
at System.Data.Entity.Core.Query.PlanCompiler.NestPullup.Visit(PhysicalProjectOp op, Node n)
at System.Data.Entity.Core.Query.InternalTrees.PhysicalProjectOp.Accept[TResultType](BasicOpVisitorOfT`1 v, Node n)
...
Entity Framework is open source, so we can actually look at the source code where this exception is thrown. The comments in this snippet explains what the problem is (https://entityframework.codeplex.com/SourceControl/latest#src/EntityFramework/Core/Query/PlanCompiler/NestPullup.cs):
// Make sure that the driving node has keys defined. Otherwise we're in
// trouble; we must be able to infer keys from the driving node.
var drivingNode = nestNode.Child0;
var drivingNodeKeys = Command.PullupKeys(drivingNode);
if (drivingNodeKeys.NoKeys)
{
// ALMINEEV: In this case we used to wrap drivingNode into a projection that would also project Edm.NewGuid() thus giving us a synthetic key.
// This solution did not work however due to a bug in SQL Server that allowed pulling non-deterministic functions above joins and applies, thus
// producing incorrect results. SQL Server bug was filed in "sqlbuvsts01\Sql Server" database as #725272.
// The only known path how we can get a keyless drivingNode is if
// - drivingNode is over a TVF call
// - TVF is declared as Collection(Row) is SSDL (the only form of TVF definitions at the moment)
// - TVF is not mapped to entities
// Note that if TVF is mapped to entities via function import mapping, and the user query is actually the call of the
// function import, we infer keys for the TVF from the c-space entity keys and their mappings.
throw new NotSupportedException(Strings.ADP_KeysRequiredForNesting);
}
That explains the path that leads to that error, so anything we can do to get off that path should fix the problem. Assuming we have to do that left join on the results of a table-valued function, one option (maybe the only option?) is to map the results of the TVF to an entity that has a primary key. Then Entity Framework will know the key values of the TVF results based on the mapping to that entity, and we should avoid these errors related to missing keys.
By default when generating an EDMX file from the database, a TVF is mapped to a complex type. There are instructions for how to change it at https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/vstudio/ee534438%28v=vs.100%29.aspx.
In my test project, I added an empty table with a schema that matched the output of the TVFs to get the model designer to generate Entities, then I went to the model browser and updated the function imports to return a collection of these entities (instead of the auto-generated complex types). After making these changes, that same LINQ query ran without errors.
var ingredientAllergenData = (from ings in db.fnListIngredientsFromItem(productId, (short)itemType, productId)
join ingAllergens in db.fnListAllergensFromItems(productId.ToString(CultureInfo.InvariantCulture), (short)itemType, currentLang)
on ings.id equals ingAllergens.ingredientId into ingAllergensData
from allergens in ingAllergensData.DefaultIfEmpty()
where ings.table == "tblIng" || ings.table == ""
select new {ings, allergens}).ToList();
Here is the trace SQL that the query gave me:
SELECT
1 AS [C1],
[Extent1].[prodId] AS [prodId],
[Extent1].[id] AS [id],
[Extent1].[parent] AS [parent],
[Extent1].[name] AS [name],
[Extent1].[ing_gtin] AS [ing_gtin],
[Extent1].[ing_artsup] AS [ing_artsup],
[Extent1].[table] AS [table],
[Extent1].[quantity] AS [quantity],
[Extent2].[prodId] AS [prodId1],
[Extent2].[ingredientId] AS [ingredientId],
[Extent2].[allergenId] AS [allergenId],
[Extent2].[allergenName] AS [allergenName],
[Extent2].[level_of_containment] AS [level_of_containment]
FROM [dbo].[fnListIngredientsFromItem](#prodId, #itemType1, #parent) AS [Extent1]
LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[fnListAllergensFromItems](#prodIdString, #itemType2, #lang) AS [Extent2] ON ([Extent1].[id] = [Extent2].[ingredientId]) OR (([Extent1].[id] IS NULL) AND ([Extent2].[ingredientId] IS NULL))
WHERE [Extent1].[table] IN ('tblIng','')

Is it Possible to Construct a Dynamic Query Based on EF Metadata?

I'm trying to determine if the following is possible as a first step.
Essentially I would like to create a mechanism where from a field name (string) and value, I could dynamically find the field name in the metadata of an entity, and create a Linq query based on that information.
Assume that I only need to worry about a single table, and the columns on the table are all strings/varchars.
So, for example, if I have a table:
MyTable
-----------------
Field1
Field2
Field3
etc.
and this table has been generated in EF, I would be able to do something like the following:
var result = CreateDynamicQuery("Field3", "my value");
And I would be able to translate this into a EF/Linq query.
The reasons why this are needed are complicated, but a more conventional query mechanism won't work in this case. What I am trying to avoid is a string-based SQL solution.
Is something like this possible?

Here is an example of how to build a query with linq expression trees and entity framework to make a simple dynamic query:
public void TestEF()
{
using (DbContext db = new ElFaktura.Data.CustomerEntities())
{
var expr = CreateQuery<Customer>("FirstName", "Lorentz");
var result = db.Set<Customer>().Where(expr);
Debug.Print(result.ToString());
}
}
public Expression<Func<Customer, bool>> CreateQuery<T>(string field, string value)
{
var paramExpr = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T));
var propExpr = Expression.Property(paramExpr, field);
var equalsExpr = Expression.Equal(propExpr, Expression.Constant(value));
return Expression.Lambda<Func<Customer,bool>>(equalsExpr, paramExpr);
}
the resulting sql is
SELECT
[Extent1].[ID] AS [ID],
[Extent1].[Email] AS [Email],
[Extent1].[AddressID] AS [AddressID],
[Extent1].[FirstName] AS [FirstName],
[Extent1].[LastName] AS [LastName]
FROM [dbo].[Customers] AS [Extent1]
WHERE (N'Lorentz' = [Extent1].[FirstName])

Using IQueryable with Linq

What is the use of IQueryable in the context of LINQ?
Is it used for developing extension methods or any other purpose?

Marc Gravell's answer is very complete, but I thought I'd add something about this from the user's point of view, as well...
The main difference, from a user's perspective, is that, when you use IQueryable<T> (with a provider that supports things correctly), you can save a lot of resources.
For example, if you're working against a remote database, with many ORM systems, you have the option of fetching data from a table in two ways, one which returns IEnumerable<T>, and one which returns an IQueryable<T>. Say, for example, you have a Products table, and you want to get all of the products whose cost is >$25.
If you do:
IEnumerable<Product> products = myORM.GetProducts();
var productsOver25 = products.Where(p => p.Cost >= 25.00);
What happens here, is the database loads all of the products, and passes them across the wire to your program. Your program then filters the data. In essence, the database does a SELECT * FROM Products, and returns EVERY product to you.
With the right IQueryable<T> provider, on the other hand, you can do:
IQueryable<Product> products = myORM.GetQueryableProducts();
var productsOver25 = products.Where(p => p.Cost >= 25.00);
The code looks the same, but the difference here is that the SQL executed will be SELECT * FROM Products WHERE Cost >= 25.
From your POV as a developer, this looks the same. However, from a performance standpoint, you may only return 2 records across the network instead of 20,000....

In essence its job is very similar to IEnumerable<T> - to represent a queryable data source - the difference being that the various LINQ methods (on Queryable) can be more specific, to build the query using Expression trees rather than delegates (which is what Enumerable uses).
The expression trees can be inspected by your chosen LINQ provider and turned into an actual query - although that is a black art in itself.
This is really down to the ElementType, Expression and Provider - but in reality you rarely need to care about this as a user. Only a LINQ implementer needs to know the gory details.
Re comments; I'm not quite sure what you want by way of example, but consider LINQ-to-SQL; the central object here is a DataContext, which represents our database-wrapper. This typically has a property per table (for example, Customers), and a table implements IQueryable<Customer>. But we don't use that much directly; consider:
using(var ctx = new MyDataContext()) {
var qry = from cust in ctx.Customers
where cust.Region == "North"
select new { cust.Id, cust.Name };
foreach(var row in qry) {
Console.WriteLine("{0}: {1}", row.Id, row.Name);
}
}
this becomes (by the C# compiler):
var qry = ctx.Customers.Where(cust => cust.Region == "North")
.Select(cust => new { cust.Id, cust.Name });
which is again interpreted (by the C# compiler) as:
var qry = Queryable.Select(
Queryable.Where(
ctx.Customers,
cust => cust.Region == "North"),
cust => new { cust.Id, cust.Name });
Importantly, the static methods on Queryable take expression trees, which - rather than regular IL, get compiled to an object model. For example - just looking at the "Where", this gives us something comparable to:
var cust = Expression.Parameter(typeof(Customer), "cust");
var lambda = Expression.Lambda<Func<Customer,bool>>(
Expression.Equal(
Expression.Property(cust, "Region"),
Expression.Constant("North")
), cust);
... Queryable.Where(ctx.Customers, lambda) ...
Didn't the compiler do a lot for us? This object model can be torn apart, inspected for what it means, and put back together again by the TSQL generator - giving something like:
SELECT c.Id, c.Name
FROM [dbo].[Customer] c
WHERE c.Region = 'North'
(the string might end up as a parameter; I can't remember)
None of this would be possible if we had just used a delegate. And this is the point of Queryable / IQueryable<T>: it provides the entry-point for using expression trees.
All this is very complex, so it is a good job that the compiler makes it nice and easy for us.
For more information, look at "C# in Depth" or "LINQ in Action", both of which provide coverage of these topics.

Although Reed Copsey and Marc Gravell already described about IQueryable (and also IEnumerable) enough,mI want to add little more here by providing a small example on IQueryable and IEnumerable as many users asked for it
Example: I have created two table in database
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Employee]([PersonId] [int] NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,[Gender] [nchar](1) NOT NULL)
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Person]([PersonId] [int] NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,[FirstName] [nvarchar](50) NOT NULL,[LastName] [nvarchar](50) NOT NULL)
The Primary key(PersonId) of table Employee is also a forgein key(personid) of table Person
Next i added ado.net entity model in my application and create below service class on that
public class SomeServiceClass
{
public IQueryable<Employee> GetEmployeeAndPersonDetailIQueryable(IEnumerable<int> employeesToCollect)
{
DemoIQueryableEntities db = new DemoIQueryableEntities();
var allDetails = from Employee e in db.Employees
join Person p in db.People on e.PersonId equals p.PersonId
where employeesToCollect.Contains(e.PersonId)
select e;
return allDetails;
}
public IEnumerable<Employee> GetEmployeeAndPersonDetailIEnumerable(IEnumerable<int> employeesToCollect)
{
DemoIQueryableEntities db = new DemoIQueryableEntities();
var allDetails = from Employee e in db.Employees
join Person p in db.People on e.PersonId equals p.PersonId
where employeesToCollect.Contains(e.PersonId)
select e;
return allDetails;
}
}
they contains same linq. It called in program.cs as defined below
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
SomeServiceClass s= new SomeServiceClass();
var employeesToCollect= new []{0,1,2,3};
//IQueryable execution part
var IQueryableList = s.GetEmployeeAndPersonDetailIQueryable(employeesToCollect).Where(i => i.Gender=="M");
foreach (var emp in IQueryableList)
{
System.Console.WriteLine("ID:{0}, EName:{1},Gender:{2}", emp.PersonId, emp.Person.FirstName, emp.Gender);
}
System.Console.WriteLine("IQueryable contain {0} row in result set", IQueryableList.Count());
//IEnumerable execution part
var IEnumerableList = s.GetEmployeeAndPersonDetailIEnumerable(employeesToCollect).Where(i => i.Gender == "M");
foreach (var emp in IEnumerableList)
{
System.Console.WriteLine("ID:{0}, EName:{1},Gender:{2}", emp.PersonId, emp.Person.FirstName, emp.Gender);
}
System.Console.WriteLine("IEnumerable contain {0} row in result set", IEnumerableList.Count());
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
The output is same for both obviously
ID:1, EName:Ken,Gender:M
ID:3, EName:Roberto,Gender:M
IQueryable contain 2 row in result set
ID:1, EName:Ken,Gender:M
ID:3, EName:Roberto,Gender:M
IEnumerable contain 2 row in result set
So the question is what/where is the difference? It does not seem to
have any difference right? Really!!
Let's have a look on sql queries generated and executed by entity
framwork 5 during these period
IQueryable execution part
--IQueryableQuery1
SELECT
[Extent1].[PersonId] AS [PersonId],
[Extent1].[Gender] AS [Gender]
FROM [dbo].[Employee] AS [Extent1]
WHERE ([Extent1].[PersonId] IN (0,1,2,3)) AND (N'M' = [Extent1].[Gender])
--IQueryableQuery2
SELECT
[GroupBy1].[A1] AS [C1]
FROM ( SELECT
COUNT(1) AS [A1]
FROM [dbo].[Employee] AS [Extent1]
WHERE ([Extent1].[PersonId] IN (0,1,2,3)) AND (N'M' = [Extent1].[Gender])
) AS [GroupBy1]
IEnumerable execution part
--IEnumerableQuery1
SELECT
[Extent1].[PersonId] AS [PersonId],
[Extent1].[Gender] AS [Gender]
FROM [dbo].[Employee] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[PersonId] IN (0,1,2,3)
--IEnumerableQuery2
SELECT
[Extent1].[PersonId] AS [PersonId],
[Extent1].[Gender] AS [Gender]
FROM [dbo].[Employee] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[PersonId] IN (0,1,2,3)
Common script for both execution part
/* these two query will execute for both IQueryable or IEnumerable to get details from Person table
Ignore these two queries here because it has nothing to do with IQueryable vs IEnumerable
--ICommonQuery1
exec sp_executesql N'SELECT
[Extent1].[PersonId] AS [PersonId],
[Extent1].[FirstName] AS [FirstName],
[Extent1].[LastName] AS [LastName]
FROM [dbo].[Person] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[PersonId] = #EntityKeyValue1',N'#EntityKeyValue1 int',#EntityKeyValue1=1
--ICommonQuery2
exec sp_executesql N'SELECT
[Extent1].[PersonId] AS [PersonId],
[Extent1].[FirstName] AS [FirstName],
[Extent1].[LastName] AS [LastName]
FROM [dbo].[Person] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[PersonId] = #EntityKeyValue1',N'#EntityKeyValue1 int',#EntityKeyValue1=3
*/
So you have few questions now, let me guess those and try to answer them
Why are different scripts generated for same result?
Lets find out some points here,
all queries has one common part
WHERE [Extent1].[PersonId] IN (0,1,2,3)
why? Because both function IQueryable<Employee> GetEmployeeAndPersonDetailIQueryable and
IEnumerable<Employee> GetEmployeeAndPersonDetailIEnumerable of SomeServiceClass contains one common line in linq queries
where employeesToCollect.Contains(e.PersonId)
Than why is the
AND (N'M' = [Extent1].[Gender]) part is missing in IEnumerable execution part, while in both function calling we used Where(i => i.Gender == "M") inprogram.cs`
Now we are in the point where difference came between IQueryable and
IEnumerable
What entity framwork does when an IQueryable method called, it tooks linq statement written inside the method and try to find out if more linq expressions are defined on the resultset, it then gathers all linq queries defined until the result need to fetch and constructs more appropriate sql query to execute.
It provide a lots of benefits like,
only those rows populated by sql server which could be valid by the
whole linq query execution
helps sql server performance by not selecting unnecessary rows
network cost get reduce
like here in example sql server returned to application only two rows after IQueryable execution` but returned THREE rows for IEnumerable query why?
In case of IEnumerable method, entity framework took linq statement written inside the method and constructs sql query when result need to fetch. it does not include rest linq part to constructs the sql query. Like here no filtering is done in sql server on column gender.
But the outputs are same? Because 'IEnumerable filters the result further in application level after retrieving result from sql server
SO, what should someone choose?
I personally prefer to define function result as IQueryable<T> because there are lots of benefit it has over IEnumerable like, you could join two or more IQueryable functions, which generate more specific script to sql server.
Here in example you can see an IQueryable Query(IQueryableQuery2) generates a more specific script than IEnumerable query(IEnumerableQuery2) which is much more acceptable in my point of view.

It allows for further querying further down the line. If this was beyond a service boundary say, then the user of this IQueryable object would be allowed to do more with it.
For instance if you were using lazy loading with nhibernate this might result in graph being loaded when/if needed.

How do you do a SQL style 'IN' statement in LINQ to Entities (Entity Framework) if Contains isn't supported?

I'm using LINQ to Entities (not LINQ to SQL) and I'm having trouble creating an 'IN' style query. Here is my query at the moment:
var items = db.InventoryItem
.Include("Kind")
.Include("PropertyValues")
.Include("PropertyValues.KindProperty")
.Where(itm => valueIds.Contains(itm.ID)).ToList<InventoryItem>();
When I do this however, the following exception is thrown:
LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'Boolean Contains(Int64)' method, and this method cannot be translated into a store expression.
Does anyone have a workaround or another solution for this?

You need to either use this one:
.Where(string.Format("it.ID in {0}", string.Join(",", valueIds.ToArray())));
or construct the WHERE part dynamically, as in this post.
P.S. - Information has been updated and this answer updated as follows to maintain relevance:
The link referenced contains the following update:
...in EF4 we added support for the
Contains method and at least in this
specific case for collection-valued
parameters. Therefore this kind of
code now works right out of the box
and it is not necesary to use any
additinal expression building method:
var statusesToFind = new List<int> {1, 2, 3, 4};
var foos = from foo in myEntities.Foos
where statusesToFind.Contains(foo.Status)
select foo;

You can use Linq's Any extension method for this in some cases:
var userIds = new[] { 1, 2, 3 };
from u in Users
where userIds.Any(i => i==u.Id)
select u;
The generated SQL looks pretty strange in such a case, but like much Linq-to-Entities generated SQL it might be overly verbose for a human, but runs fast in practice.
SELECT
[Extent1].[Id] AS [Id],
[Extent1].[DisplayName] AS [DisplayName],
FROM [dbo].[Users] AS [Extent1]
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT
1 AS [C1]
FROM (SELECT
[UnionAll1].[C1] AS [C1]
FROM (SELECT
1 AS [C1]
FROM ( SELECT 1 AS X ) AS [SingleRowTable1]
UNION ALL
SELECT
2 AS [C1]
FROM ( SELECT 1 AS X ) AS [SingleRowTable2]) AS [UnionAll1]
UNION ALL
SELECT
3 AS [C1]
FROM ( SELECT 1 AS X ) AS [SingleRowTable3]) AS [UnionAll2]
WHERE [UnionAll2].[C1] = [Extent1].[Id]
)

As mentioned by Diego B Vega in this post (second answer), Contains should now work in EF4.

My workaround is to convert the entities result to a List and after that apply the Contains().
Example:
var items = db.InventoryItem
.Include("Kind")
.Include("PropertyValues")
.Include("PropertyValues.KindProperty")
.ToList()
.Where(itm => valueIds.Contains(itm.ID));