I'm trying to get the points in a database that are at a distance of no more than 200 meters away, and i'm using the following code but it also retrieves all the points in the data base
var pin = from pinsA in db.PINS
.Where(p => p.PRIVACY == 0 || p.USER_ID == userId
&& (double)currentPoint.Distance(p.location) < 200.0)
.Select(pr => new { pr.PIN_ID, pr.TYPE, pr.location })
select new { pinsA.PIN_ID, pinsA.TYPE, pinsA.location } ;
You don't provide the specific conditions but I think you are missing parenthesis in your Where clause, try:
Where((p => p.PRIVACY == 0 || p.USER_ID == userId)
&& (double)currentPoint.Distance(p.location) < 200.0)
Although its a preference thing, I'm not sure on the need to mix-match the query "languages" (which probably isn't helping), nor the need for a "double" select.
I also agree with jnovo's post on that you are most likely missing parenthesis in your where clause, but try either of the following:
Option 1:
var pinsWithin200 = from pins in db.Pins
where ((pins.PRIVACY == 0 || pins.USER_ID == userId) && pins.location.Distance(currentPoint) <= 200)
select new
{
PIN_ID = pins.PIN_ID,
TYPE = pins.TYPE,
location = pins.location
};
var results = pinsWithin200.ToList();
Option 2:
var pinsWithin200 = db.Pins
.Where(p => (p.PRIVACY == 0 || p.USER_ID == userId) && p.location.Distance(currentPoint) <= 200)
.Select(p => new
{
PIN_ID = p.PIN_ID,
TYPE = p.TYPE,
location = p.location
};
var results = pinsWithin200.ToList();
Whichever you prefer, they are cleaner, and without the double-select. Also note its good practise to explicitly name your properties in anonymous types.
Related
This is my LINQ
IList<string> ExceptList = new List<string>() { "045C388E96", "C9B735E166", "02860EB192", "2401016471" };
var listusers = context.USER_INFO.Where(x => x.ACTIVATED
&& x.COMP.EQUIPMENT.Count(y => y.STATUS == (int)STATUSEQ.ACTIVE) > 0
&& (x.LAST_LOGIN < time)
&& !ExceptList.Contains(x.COMP.CODE)
&& !x.IS_LOCK
|| !x.COMP.IS_LOCK)
.Select(x => new EmailOutOfDateLoginModel
{
COMPCode = x.COMP.CODE,
First_Name = x.FIRST_NAME,
Last_Name = x.LAST_NAME,
Total_EQ = x.COMP.EQUIPMENT.Count(y => y.STATUS == (int)STATUSEQ.ACTIVE),
User_Email = x.USER_EMAIL
}).ToList();
I am not sure why my ExceptList is not working. I want to exclude any record that contaisn any of the CODE in the ExceptList
Put parentheses around the expressions containing the && logic. The || at the end is only matched with the !x.IS_LOCK || !x.COMP.IS_LOCK otherwise.
According your linq all records where (!x.COMP.IS_LOCK==true) will be included in the query. Try this "where" part:
.Where(x => x.ACTIVATED
&& x.COMP.EQUIPMENT.Count(y => y.STATUS == (int)STATUSEQ.ACTIVE) > 0
&& (x.LAST_LOGIN < time)
&& !ExceptList.Contains(x.COMP.CODE)
&& !(x.IS_LOCK && x.COMP.IS_LOCK))
Let's say I have the following filter parameters:
Type="Student"
School = "High"
ReferenceID = "123abc"
PaymentOnFile= "Y"
Now, I need to find 1st student based on these 4 parameters. If no students are found then I need to find them based on the 3 parameters, if no students are found then use 2 parameters, etc.
Here's my current code:
var Student = db.Students.Where(x=> x.School == School && x.Type == Type && x.ReferenceID == ReferenceID && x.PaymentOnFile == PaymentOnFile).FirstOrDefault();
if (Student == null)
{
Student = db.Students.Where(x=> x.School == School && x.Type == Type && x.ReferenceID == ReferenceID).FirstOrDefault();
}
if (Student == null)
{
Student = db.Students.Where(x=> x.School == School && x.Type == Type).FirstOrDefault();
}
if (Student == null)
{
Student = db.Students.Where(x=> x.School == School).FirstOrDefault();
}
return Student;
This works but it is not very efficient and ugly. What is a better way to do this? Maybe using expression trees or something else but I cannot figure it out.
SQL also works!
I think something like this would work:
var student = db.Students
.Where(x => x.School == school)
.OrderBy(x => (x.Type == type) ? 0 : 1)
.ThenBy(x => (x.ReferenceID == referenceId) ? 0 : 1)
.ThenBy(x => (x.PaymentOnFile == paymentOnFile) ? 0 : 1)
.FirstOrDefault();
This dynamic solution will perform exactly your recursive logic and will work at case of Linq and EF. You can add another conditions(to predicates, order matters), solution(for loop) will remain the same.
var predicates = new List<Expression<Func<Student, bool>>>
{
x => x.School == "High",
x => x.Type == "Student",
x => x.ReferenceID == "123abc",
x => x.PaymentOnFile == "Y",
};
Student student = null;
for(var i = 0; i < predicates.Count; i++)
{
var query = db.Students.AsQueryable();
for (var j = 0; j < predicates.Count - i; j++)
query = query.Where(predicates[j]);
if ((student = query.FirstOrDefault()) != null)
break;
}
i guess if you could apply this query logic which can help you better
SELECT TOP 1
*
FROM Student AS S
ORDER BY CASE
WHEN S.School = #School AND S.[Type] = #Type AND S.ReferenceID = #ReferenceID AND S.PaymentOnFile = #PaymentOnFile THEN
1
WHEN S.School = #School AND S.[Type] = #Type AND S.ReferenceID = #ReferenceID THEN
2
WHEN S.School = #School AND S.[Type] = #Type THEN
3
WHEN S.School = #School THEN
4
END ASC
This is my Code where I am fetching data.
var list = (from u in _dbContext.Users
where u.IsActive
&& u.IsVisible
&& u.IsPuller.HasValue
&& u.IsPuller.Value
select new PartsPullerUsers
{
AvatarCroppedAbsolutePath = u.AvatarCroppedAbsolutePath,
Bio = u.Bio,
CreateDateTime = u.CreationDate,
Id = u.Id,
ModifieDateTime = u.LastModificationDate,
ReviewCount = u.ReviewsReceived.Count(review => review.IsActive && review.IsVisible),
UserName = u.UserName,
Locations = (from ul in _dbContext.UserLocationRelationships
join l in _dbContext.Locations on ul.LocationId equals l.Id
where ul.IsActive && ul.UserId == u.Id
select new PartsPullerLocation
{
LocationId = ul.LocationId,
Name = ul.Location.Name
}),
Rating = u.GetPullerRating()
});
Now Here is my Extension.
public static int GetPullerRating(this User source)
{
var reviewCount = source.ReviewsReceived.Count(r => r.IsActive && r.IsVisible);
if (reviewCount == 0)
return 0;
var totalSum = source.ReviewsReceived.Where(r => r.IsActive && r.IsVisible).Sum(r => r.Rating);
var averageRating = totalSum / reviewCount;
return averageRating;
}
I have check this Post LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method
And I come to know I need to use
public System.Linq.Expressions.Expression<Func<Row52.Data.Entities.User, int>> GetPullerRatingtest
But how ?
Thanks
You can use conditionals inside LINQ to Entity queries:
AverageRating = u.ReviewsReceived.Count(r => r.IsActive && r.IsVisible) > 0 ?
u.ReviewsReceived.Where(r => r.IsActive && r.IsVisible).Sum(r => r.Rating) /
u.ReviewsReceived.Count(r => r.IsActive && r.IsVisible)
: 0
This will be calculated by the server, and returned as part of your list. Although with 10 million rows like you said, I would do some serious filtering before executing this.
Code within LINQ (to Entities) query is executed within database, so you can't put random C# code there. So you should either use user.GetPullerRating() after it is retrieved or create a property if you don't want to do the calculation every time.
You can also do:
foreach (var u in list)
u.Rating = u.GetPullerRating()
By the way, why is it extension method.
I have Table HR_Travel(TravelID, TravelCode....) and HR_TravelDocuments(TravelDocID, TravelID, DocUrl)
FromDate = FromDate.AddDays(1);
ToDate = ToDate.AddDays(1);
List<dynamic> Lst = new List<dynamic>();
var queryTravelDetails = from t in db.HR_TravelDetails
where ((t.StatusDate >= FromDate && t.StatusDate <= ToDate)
&& (t.EmpID == EmpID || EmpID == 0) && (t.TravelStatus == TravelStatus || TravelStatus == "All"))
orderby t.StatusDate descending
select new
{
TravelID = t.TravelID,
TravelSubID = db.HR_TravelDetails.Where(i => i.TravelID == 0).FirstOrDefault().TravelID == null ? 0 : db.HR_TravelDetails.Where(i => i.TravelID == 0).FirstOrDefault().TravelID,
t.TravelCode,
t.EmpID,
EmpName = db.EE_Employee.Where(i => i.EmpID == t.EmpID).FirstOrDefault().EmpName,
t.CellNo,
t.BoardingForm,
t.DestinationTO,
t.JournyDate,
t.Purpose,
t.Organization,
t.TravelStatus,
DocUrl = DocUrl = string.Join(",",( db.HR_TravelDocuments.Where(i => i.TravelID == t.TravelID && i.TravelSubID == 0).Select(i => i.DocUrl).ToList()))
};
foreach (var element in queryTravelDetails)
{
Lst.Add(element);
}
Gives the following error:
LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'System.String Join[String](System.String, System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable`1[System.String])' method, and this method cannot be translated into a store expression.
The Join() method can't be used in LINQ expressions, because it cannot translate from CLR to T-SQL. Another example is that you can't use:
var itemCount = db.Table.Count(p => p.Something == SomeFunction(someVariable));
You should move the method call outside the LINQ statement:
var anotherVariable = SomeFunction(someVariable);
var itemCount = db.Table.Count(p => p.Something == anotherVariable);
I hope I explained in a good way.
EDIT: As seen in the comments before, you can also use ToArray() and when the data is loaded locally you can use functions in statements freely.
All I want to do is declare var place correctly so it is still in scope once I get to the foreach loop. I'm assuming I need to declare it before the if statement for connections. Is this a correct assumption and if so how do I declare it? Thanks!
using (var db = new DataClasses1DataContext())
{
if (connections == "Connections")
{
var place = (from v in db.pdx_aparts
where v.Latitude != null && v.Region == region && v.WD_Connect >= 1
select new
{
locName = v.Apartment_complex.Trim().Replace(#"""", ""),
latitude = v.Latitude,
longitude = v.Longitude
}).Distinct().ToArray();
}
else
{
var place = (from v in db.pdx_aparts
where v.Latitude != null && v.Region == region && ((v.WD_Connect == null) || (v.WD_Connect == 0))
select new
{
locName = v.Apartment_complex.Trim().Replace(#"""", ""),
latitude = v.Latitude,
longitude = v.Longitude
}).Distinct().ToArray();
}
foreach (var result in place)
....
You can create an array with a single entry whose value you ignore later:
// Note: names *and types* must match the ones you use later on.
var place = new[] { new { locName = "", latitude = 0.0, longitude = 0.0 } };
if (connections = "Connections")
{
// Note: not a variable declaration
place = ...;
}
else
{
place = ...;
}
This works because every use of anonymous types using properties with the same names and types, in the same order, will use the same concrete type.
I think it would be better to make the code only differ in the parts that it needs to though:
var query = v.db.pdx_aparts.Where(v => v.Latitude != null && v.Region == region);
query = connections == "Connections"
? query.Where(v => v.WD_Connect >= 1)
: query.Where(v => v.WD_Connect == null || v.WD_Connect == 0);
var places = query.Select(v => new
{
locName = v.Apartment_complex
.Trim()
.Replace("\"", ""),
latitude = v.Latitude,
longitude = v.Longitude
})
.Distinct()
.ToArray();
Here it's much easier to tell that the only part which depends on the connections value is the section of the query which deals with WD_Connect.
You could convert the if to a ?:.
var place = connections == "Connections" ? monsterQuery1 : monsterQuery2;
I do not think this is a good solution because your queries are too big (unreadable).
It would be much better if you introduced a named class that you use instead of the anonymous type. R# does that for you in a "light bulb menu" refactoring.
you could just use the 1 query since they are pretty much the same, and just add the extra condition in the where clause
var place = (from v in db.pdx_aparts
where v.Latitude != null && v.Region == region
&& connections == "Connections"
? v.WD_Connect >= 1
: ((v.WD_Connect == null) || (v.WD_Connect == 0))
select new
{
locName = v.Apartment_complex.Trim().Replace(#"""", ""),
latitude = v.Latitude,
longitude = v.Longitude
}).Distinct().ToArray();
foreach (var result in place)
....