Develop Reference

C# Entity Framework: Data validation between add to context and saveChanges()

I have a simple scenario using the Entity Framework in C#. I have an Entity Post:
public class Post
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
}
In my PostManager I have these methods:
public int AddPost(string name, string description)
{
var post = new Post() { Name = name, Description = description };
using (var db = new DbContext())
{
var res = db.Posts.Add(post);
res.Validate();
db.SaveChanges();
return res.Id;
}
}
public void UpdatePost(int postId, string newName, string newDescription)
{
using (var db = new DbContext())
{
var data = (from post in db.Posts.AsEnumerable()
where post.Id == postId
select post).FirstOrDefault();
data.Name = newName;
data.Description = newDescription;
data.Validate();
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
The method validate() refers to class:
public static class Validator
{
public static void Validate(this Post post)
{
if ( // some control)
throw new someException();
}
I call the validate method before the savechanges() but after adding the object to the context. What's the best practice to validate data in this simple scenario? It's better validate the arguments instead? What's happen to object post if the validate method throw exception after adding the object to the context?
UPDATE:
I have to throw a custom set of exception depending on data validation error.

I strongly recommend you to (if at all possible) to modify your entity so the setters are private (don't worry, EF can still set them on proxy creation), mark the default constructor as protected (EF can still do lazy loading/proxy creation), and make the only public constructors available check the arguments.
This has several benefits:
You limit the number of places where the state of an entity can be changed, leading to less duplication
You protect your class' invariants. By forcing creation of an entity to go via a constructor, you ensure that it is IMPOSSIBLE for an object of your entity to exist in an invalid or unknown state.
You get higher cohesion. By putting the constraints on data closer to the data itself, it becomes easier to understand and reason about your classes.
You code becomes self-documenting to a higher degree. One never has to wonder "is it OK if I set a negative value on this int property?" if it is impossible to even do it in the first place.
Separation of concerns. Your manager shouldn't know how to validate an entity, this just leads to high coupling. I've seen many managers grow into unmaintainable monsters because they simply do everything. Persisting, loading, validation, error handling, conversion, mapping etc. This is basically the polar opposite of SOLID OOP.
I know it is really popular nowadays to just make all "models" into stupid property bags with getters and setters and only a default constructor because (bad) ORMs have forced us to do this, but this is no longer the case, and there are so many issues with this imo.
Code example:
public class Post
{
protected Post() // this constructor is only for EF proxy creation
{
}
public Post(string name, string description)
{
if (/* validation check, inline or delegate */)
throw new ArgumentException();
Name = name;
Description = description;
}
public int Id { get; private set; }
public string Name { get; private set; }
public string Description { get; private set; }
}
Then your PostManager code becomes trivial:
using (var db = new DbContext())
{
var post = new Post(name, description); // possibly try-catch here
db.Posts.Add(post);
db.SaveChanges();
return post.Id;
}
If the creation/validation logic is extremely intricate this pattern lends itself very well for refactoring to a factory taking care of the creation.
I would also note that encapsulating data in entities exposing a minimal state-changing API leads to classes that are several orders of magnitude easier to test in isolation, if you care at all about that sort of thing.

As I mentioned in the comments above, you might want to check out .NET System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations namespace.
Data Annotations (DA) allows you to specify attributes on properties to describe what values are acceptable. It's important to know that DA is completely independent of databases and ORM APIs such as Entity Framework so classes decorated with DA attributes can be used in any tier of your system whether it be the data tier; WCF; ASP.NET MVC or WPF.
In the example below, I define a Muppet class with a series of properties.
Name is required and has a max length of 50.
Scaryness takes an int but it must be in the range of {0...100}.
Email is decorated with an imaginary custom validator for validating strings that should contain an e-mail.
Example:
public class Muppet
{
[Required]
[StringLength(50)]
public string Name {get; set;}
public Color Color {get; set; }
[Range(0,100)]
public int Scaryness {get; set; }
[MyCustomEmailValidator]
public string Email {get;set; }
}
In my project I have to throw customException when i validate the data. It's possible do it using Data Annotations?
Yes you can. To validate this object at any time of your application (regardless of whether it has reached EF or not) just perform this:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations;
using System.Linq;
.
.
.
Post post = ... // fill it in
Validator.Validate(post);
public static class Validator
{
public static void Validate(this Post post)
{
// uses the extension method GetValidationErrors defined below
if (post.GetValidationErrors().Any())
{
throw new MyCustomException();
}
}
}
public static class ValidationHelpers
{
public static IEnumerable<ValidationResult> GetValidationErrors(this object obj)
{
var validationResults = new List<ValidationResult>();
var context = new ValidationContext(obj, null, null);
Validator.TryValidateObject(obj, context, validationResults, true);
return validationResults;
}
.
.
.
If you want to get the validation error messages you could use this method:
/// <summary>
/// Gets the validation error messages for column.
/// </summary>
/// <param name="obj">The object.</param>
/// <returns></returns>
public static string GetValidationErrorMessages(this object obj)
{
var error = "";
var errors = obj.GetValidationErrors();
var validationResults = errors as ValidationResult[] ?? errors.ToArray();
if (!validationResults.Any())
{
return error;
}
foreach (var ee in validationResults)
{
foreach (var n in ee.MemberNames)
{
error += ee + "; ";
}
}
return error;
}
The free set of steak knives is that the validation attributes will be detected once the object reaches EF where it will be validated there as well in case you forget or the object is changed since.

I think you should be working with Data Annotation as #Micky says above. Your current approach is validating manually after it has been added.
using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations;
// Your class
public class Post
{
[Required]
public int Id { get; set; }
[Required,MaxLength(50)]
public string Name { get; set; }
[Required,MinLength(15),MyCustomCheck] // << Here is your custom validator
public string Description { get; set; }
}
// Your factory methods
public class MyFactory() {
public bool AddPost() {
var post = new Post() { Id = 1, Name = null, Description = "This is my test post"};
try {
using (var db = new DbContext()) {
db.Posts.Add(post);
db.SaveChanges();
return true;
}
} catch(System.Data.Entity.Validation.DbEntityValidationException e) {
Console.WriteLine("Something went wrong....");
} catch(MyCustomException e) {
Console.WriteLine(" a Custom Exception was triggered from a custom data annotation...");
}
return false;
}
}
// The custom attribute
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property | AttributeTargets.Field, AllowMultiple = false)]
sealed public class MyCustomCheckAttribute : ValidationAttribute
{
public override bool IsValid(object value)
{
if (value instanceof string) {
throw new MyCustomException("The custom exception was just triggered....")
} else {
return true;
}
}
}
// Your custom exception
public class MyCustomException : Exception() {}
See also:
DbEntityValidationException class: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.data.entity.validation.dbentityvalidationexception(v=vs.113).aspx
Default data annotations
http://www.entityframeworktutorial.net/code-first/dataannotation-in-code-first.aspx
Building your custom data annotations (validators):
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc668224.aspx

I always use two validations:
client side - using jQuery Unobtrusive Validation in combination with Data Annotations
server side validation - and here it depends on application - validation is performed in controller actions or deeper in business logic. Nice place to do it is to override OnSave method in your context and do it there
Remember that you can write custom Data Annotation attributes which can validate whatever you need.

You can modify the code in this way:
public int AddPost(string name, string description)
{
var post = new Post() { Name = name, Description = description };
if(res.Validate())
{
using (var db = new DbContext())
{
var res = db.Posts.Add(post);
db.SaveChanges();
return res.Id;
}
}
else
return -1; //if not success
}
public static bool Validate(this Post post)
{
bool isValid=false;
//validate post and change isValid to true if success
if(isvalid)
return true;
}
else
return false;
}

After adding data to DbContext and before calling SaveChanges() you can call GetValidationErrors() method of DbContext and check its count to quiqckly check if there are any errors. You can further enumerate all of errors and get error details against each of them. I have bundled Error conversion from ICollection to string in GetValidationErrorsString() extension method.
if (db.GetValidationErrors().Count() > 0)
{
var errorString = db.GetValidationErrorsString();
}
public static string GetValidationErrorsString(this DbContext dbContext)
{
var validationErrors = dbContext.GetValidationErrors();
string errorString = string.Empty;
foreach (var error in validationErrors)
{
foreach (var innerError in error.ValidationErrors)
{
errorString += string.Format("Property: {0}, Error: {1}<br/>", innerError.PropertyName, innerError.ErrorMessage);
}
}
return errorString;
}

ServiceStack support for conditionally omitting fields from a REST response on a per-call basis

<TL;DR>
At a minimum, I'm looking for a way to conditionally exclude certain properties on the resource from being included in the response on a per-call basis (See fields below).
Ideally, I'd like to implement a REST service with ServiceStack that supports all the major points below.
UPDATE
While I really like ServiceStack's approach in general and would prefer to use it if possible, if it isn't particularly well suited towards these ideas I'd rather not bend over backwards bastardizing it to make it work. If that's the case, can anyone point to another c# framework that might be more appropriate? I'm actively exploring other options myself, of course.
</TD;DR>
In this talk entitled Designing REST + JSON APIs, the presenter describes his strategy for Resource References (via href property on resources) in JSON. In addition to this, he describes two query parameters (fields and expand) for controlling what data is included the response of a call to a REST service. I've been trying without success to dig into the ServiceStack framework to achieve support for fields in particular but have thus far been unsuccessful. Is this currently possible in ServiceStack? Ideally the solution would be format agnostic and would therefore work across all of ServiceStack's supported output formats. I would imagine expand would follow the same strategy.
I'll describe these features here but I think the talk at the link does a better job of explaining them.
Lets say we have an Profiles resource with the following properties: givenName, surname, gender, and favColor. The Profiles resource also includes a list of social networks the user belongs to in the socialNetworks property.
href - (42:22 in video) Every resource includes a full link to it on the REST service. A call to GET /profiles/123 would return
{
"href":"https://host/profiles/123",
"givenName":"Bob",
"surname":"Smith",
"gender":"male",
"favColor":"red",
"socialNetworks": {
"href":"https://host/socialNetworkMemberships?profileId=123"
}
}
Notice that the socialNetworks property returns an object with just the href value populated. This keeps the response short and focused while also giving the end user enough information to make further requests if desired. The href property, used across the board in this manor, makes it easy (conceptually anyway) to reuse resource data structures as children of other resources.
fields - (55:44 in video) Query string parameter that instructs the server to only include the specified properties of the desired resource in the REST response.
A normal response from GET /profiles/123 would include all the properties of the resource as seen above. When the fields query param is included in the request, only the fields specified are returned. 'GET /propfiles/123?fields=surname,favColor' would return
{
"href":"https://host/profiles/123",
"surname":"Smith",
"favColor":"red"
}
expand - (45:53 in video) Query string parameter that instructs the server to flesh out the specified child resources in the result. Using our example, if you were to call GET /profiles/123?expand=socialNetworks you might receive something like
{
"href":"https://host/profiles/123",
"givenName":"Bob",
"surname":"Smith",
"gender":"male",
"favColor":"red",
"socialNetworks": {
"href":"https://host/socialNetworkMemberships?profileId=123",
"items": [
{
"href":"https://host/socialNetworkMemberships/abcde",
"siteName":"Facebook",
"profileUrl":"http://www.facebook.com/..."
},
...
]
}
}

So...in my opinion ServiceStack's best feature is that it makes sending, receiving and handling POCOs over HTTP super easy. How you set up the POCOs and what you do in between (within the 'Service') is up to you. Does SS have opinions? Yes. Do you have to agree with them? No. (But you probably should :))
I think expanding on something like below would get you close to how you want to handle your api. Probably not the best example of ServiceStack but the ServiceStack code/requirements are barely noticeable and don't get in your way (AppHost configure not shown). You could probably do something similar in other .NET Frameworks (MVC/Web API/etc) but, in my opinion, won't look as much like straight C#/.NET code as with ServiceStack.
Request classes
[Route("/Profiles/{Id}")]
public class Profiles
{
public int? Id { get; set; }
}
[Route("/SocialNetworks/{Id}")]
public class SocialNetworks
{
public int? Id { get; set; }
}
Base Response class
public class BaseResponse
{
protected virtual string hrefPath
{
get { return ""; }
}
public string Id { get; set; }
public string href { get { return hrefPath + Id; } }
}
Classes from example
public class Profile : BaseResponse
{
protected override string hrefPath { get { return "https://host/profiles/"; } }
public string GivenName { get; set; }
public string SurName { get; set; }
public string Gender { get; set; }
public string FavColor { get; set; }
public List<BaseResponse> SocialNetworks { get; set; }
}
public class SocialNetwork: BaseResponse
{
protected override string hrefPath { get { return "https://host/socialNetworkMemberships?profileId="; }}
public string SiteName { get; set; }
public string ProfileUrl { get; set; }
}
Services
public class ProfileService : Service
{
public object Get(Profiles request)
{
var testProfile = new Profile { Id= "123", GivenName = "Bob", SurName = "Smith", Gender = "Male", FavColor = "Red",
SocialNetworks = new List<BaseResponse>
{
new SocialNetwork { Id = "abcde", SiteName = "Facebook", ProfileUrl = "http://www.facebook.com/"}
}
};
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(this.Request.QueryString.Get("fields")) || !String.IsNullOrEmpty(this.Request.QueryString.Get("expand")))
return ServiceHelper.BuildResponseObject<Profile>(testProfile, this.Request.QueryString);
return testProfile;
}
}
public class SocialNetworkService : Service
{
public object Get(SocialNetworks request)
{
var testSocialNetwork = new SocialNetwork
{
Id = "abcde",
SiteName = "Facebook",
ProfileUrl = "http://www.facebook.com/"
};
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(this.Request.QueryString.Get("fields")) || !String.IsNullOrEmpty(this.Request.QueryString.Get("expand")))
return ServiceHelper.BuildResponseObject<SocialNetwork>(testSocialNetwork, this.Request.QueryString);
return testSocialNetwork;
}
}
Reflection Helper Class
public static class ServiceHelper
{
public static object BuildResponseObject<T>(T typedObject, NameValueCollection queryString) where T: BaseResponse
{
var newObject = new ExpandoObject() as IDictionary<string, object>;
newObject.Add("href", typedObject.href);
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(queryString.Get("fields")))
{
foreach (var propertyName in queryString.Get("fields").Split(',').ToList())
{
//could check for 'socialNetwork' and exclude if you wanted
newObject.Add(propertyName, typedObject.GetType().GetProperty(propertyName, BindingFlags.IgnoreCase | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance).GetValue(typedObject, null));
}
}
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(queryString.Get("expand")))
{
foreach (var propertyName in queryString.Get("expand").Split(',').ToList())
{
newObject.Add(propertyName, typedObject.GetType().GetProperty(propertyName, BindingFlags.IgnoreCase | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance).GetValue(typedObject, null));
}
}
return newObject;
}
}

Usually you can control the serialization of your DTOs by setting the DataMember attributes. With those attributes you can control if the property should have defaults or not.
Meaning if you simply do not define the property of the object you want to return, it should not be serialized and therefore will not be shown in the resulting Json.
ServiceStack internally uses the standard DataContract...Serializer, so this should be supported
Otherwise you could also make use of dynamic objects and simply compose your object at runtime, serialize it and send it back.
Here is a very very basic example:
var seri = JsonSerializer.Create(new JsonSerializerSettings() { });
using (var textWriter = new StringWriter())
{
var writer = new JsonTextWriter(textWriter);
dynamic item = new { Id = id };
seri.Serialize(writer, item);
return textWriter.ToString();
}

Accessing custom objects in DomainService from client

I am using Domain Service to fetch data from database from Silverlight Client.
In DomainService1.cs, I have added the following:
[EnableClientAccess()]
public class Product
{
public int productID;
public string productName;
public List<Part> Parts = new List<Part>(); //Part is already present in Model designer
}
In DomainService1 class I added a new method to retrive a collection of the custom class object:
[EnableClientAccess()]
public class DomainService1 : LinqToEntitiesDomainService<HELPERDBNEWEntities1>
{
...
public List<Product> GetProductsList(...)
{
List<Product> resultProducts = new List<Product>();
...
return resultProducts;
}
}
From the silverlight client I am trying to access that method:
DomainService1 ds1 = new DomainService1();
var allproductList = ds1.GetProductsList(...);
ds1.Load<SLProduct>(allproductList).Completed += new EventHandler(Load_Completed); //Not correct usage
However it is not the correct way to call the new method. The reason I added a new class Product in DomainServices.cs is to have an efficient grouping. I cannot achieve the same using the model classes auto-generated by the entity framework.
How call I call the new method from the client?

I believe there is a similar question with an answer here:
Can a DomainService return a single custom type?
Also, here is some discussion about the overall problem of adding custom methods in a Domain Service:
http://forums.silverlight.net/t/159292.aspx/1

While I don't know what you mean by "it is not the correct way to call the new method", or if you're getting any errors, I thought maybe posting some working code might help.
My POCO
public class GraphPointWithMeta
{
[Key]
public Guid PK { get; set; }
public string SeriesName { get; set; }
public string EntityName { get; set; }
public double Amount { get; set; }
public GraphPointWithMeta(string seriesName, string entityName, double amount)
{
PK = Guid.NewGuid();
SeriesName = seriesName;
EntityName = entityName;
Amount = amount;
}
// Default ctor required.
public GraphPointWithMeta()
{
PK = Guid.NewGuid();
}
}
A method in the domain service (EnableClientAccess decorates the class)
public IEnumerable<GraphPointWithMeta> CallingActivityByCommercial()
{
List<GraphPointWithMeta> gps = new List<GraphPointWithMeta>();
// ...
return gps;
}
Called from the Silverlight client like
ctx1.Load(ctx1.CallingActivityByCommercialQuery(), CallingActivityCompleted, null);
client call back method
private void CallingActivityCompleted(LoadOperation<GraphPointWithMeta> lo)
{
// lo.Entities is an IEnumerable<GraphPointWithMeta>
}

I am not sure if your Product class is an actual entity or not. From the way it is defined, it does not appear to be an entity. My answer is assuming it is not an entity. You will need to apply the DataMemberAttribute for your Product properties, and you wouldn't load the product list - load is for Entity Queries (IQueryable on the service side). You would just invoke it like this (client side):
void GetProductList( Action<InvokeOperation<List<Product>>> callback)
{
DomainService ds1 = new DomainService();
ds1.GetProductsList(callback, null);//invoke operation call
}
And the domain service's (server side) method needs the InvokeAttribute and would look like this:
[EnableClientAccess]
public class MyDomainService
{
[Invoke]
public List<Product> GetProductList()
{
var list = new List<Product>();
...
return list;
}
}
And here is how your Product class might be defined (if it is not an entity):
public class Product
{
[DataMember]
public int productID;
[DataMember]
public string productName;
[DataMember]
public List<Part> Parts = new List<Part>(); // you might have some trouble here.
//not sure if any other attributes are needed for Parts,
//since you said this is an entity; also not sure if you
//can even have a list of entities or it needs to be an
//entity collection or what it needs to be. You might
//have to make two separate calls - one to get the products
//and then one to get the parts.
}
Like I said, i am not sure what Product inherits from... Hope this helps.

Attributes of properties in MetadataType are ignored by EntLib Validation

It's an EntLib-Validator-issue again. I'm playing with EntLib 5.0 in C# and .Net 4.0 on XP pro.
I have some business objects (partial classes) generated by T4 templates. So I decided to put their validation attributes in buddy-classes by using MetadataTypeAttribute as definitely recommended by the documentation of entLib 5.0 (msdn).
But the Validator object I get from the ValidatorFactory doesn't know about the validation attributes, defined in the metadata-class.
The business object is defined like this:
[MetadataType(typeof(PatientMetadata))]
public partial class Patient
{
private string _Name;
private int _DiagnosisCount;
public int DiagnosisCount
{
get
{
return _DiagnosisCount;
}
set
{
if (value != _DiagnosisCount)
{
_DiagnosisCount = value;
}
}
}
public string Name
{
get
{
return _Name;
}
set
{
if (value != _Name)
{
_Name = value;
}
}
}
}
And the metadata class like this, according to documentation:
public class PatientMetadata
{
[RangeValidator(4)]
public int DiagnosisCount { get; set; }
[StringLengthValidator(64, ErrorMessage = "Name must not exceed 64 chars.")]
public string Name { get; set; }
}
If I know try to do validation this way:
var factory = ValidationFactory.DefaultCompositeValidatorFactory;
var validator = factory.CreateValidator<Patient>();
...then watching into validator (during debugging) already says, that it's just an AndCompositeValidator without any children validators.
Again, if I put the validation attributes right in the Patient class, it works perfectly.
By now, I have no real idea, what I'm missing here, since I think doing everything according to the docs.
Thanks in advance to you guys!

The property names of the metadata class must match the property names of the main class.
In your case your metadata class should look like:
public class PatientMetadata
{
[RangeValidator(0, RangeBoundaryType.Inclusive, 10, RangeBoundaryType.Ignore)]
public int DiagnosisCount { get; set; }
[StringLengthValidator(6, ErrorMessage = "Name must not exceed 6 chars.")]
public string Name { get; set; }
}
Also, the docs indicate the accepted approach is to declare all return types as object. However, the docs also talk about using properties but in their example use fields so take it under advisement. :)

Custom DataAnnotation attributes

When I use DisplayAttribute in ASP.NET MVC 3 models it quickly becomes a pain writing them because we have to either hardcode the string or reference the string from a some static class that contains const strings (which is what I have now, see below). But even that is too much for me.
I would like to come up with an attribute that would be called something like [SimpleDisplay] and it would implicitly construct the string for resources by looking at
class name,
property name that the attribute is attached to.
Is this possible?
Something like this
public class Product {
[SimpleDisplay] // it will take Product and Name and do something like this Product_Name
public string Name { get; set; }
}
This is what I want to get rid of, if possible:
[Display(ResourceType = typeof(Resources.Localize), Name = ResourceStrings.product_prettyid)]
public virtual int PrettyId
{
get;
set;
}
[Display(ResourceType = typeof(Resources.Localize), Name = ResourceStrings.product_name)]
public virtual string Title
{
get;
set;
}
Now I know that it is not possible to inherit the DisplayAttribute cause it's sealed. What other options I have? Does it even make sense?

I would try creating just a standard attribute and custom DataAnnotationsModelMetadataProvider. You can override CreateMetadata method, which gets IEnumerable<Attribute>. You should than search for your attribute
attributes.OfType<SimpleDisplayAttribute>().FirstOrDefault();
and populate model metadata in any way you want.

If i have a correct understanding what you mean, you may just create a simple custom attribute like this one:
public class LocalizedDisplayNameAttribute : DisplayNameAttribute {
public LocalizedDisplayNameAttribute(string expression) : base(expression) { }
public override string DisplayName {
get {
try {
string[] vals = base.DisplayName.Split(',');
if(vals != null && vals.Length == 2)
return (string)HttpContext.GetGlobalResourceObject(vals[0].Trim(), vals[1].Trim());
} catch {}
return "{res:" + base.DisplayName + "}";
}
}
}
You may then use it as an attribute on your properies. MVC HTML extensions will pickup your custom attribute.
[LocalizedDisplayName("LBL, lbl_name1")]
public string[] Name1 { get; set; }