Converting SQL statement using SUM() to Linq/Entity Framework - c#

I'm trying to figure out how to convert the following SQL statement to Entity Framework using Linq:
SELECT SUM(Column1) AS Correct
, SUM(Column2) AS Incorrect
, UserName
FROM Stats
WHERE (StatType = 0)
GROUP BY UserName
ORDER BY UserName
For the purposes of this question, all the column types in the DB are type INT, and there are multiple rows of data per user. I basically want 3 columns in my output, with the total of correct & incorrect selections for each user.
It seems like such a simple SQL statement but whatever I try in something like LinqPad, I always get errors. I must be missing something relatively simple. As soon as I start add a ".Sum" clause I get compilation errors etc.
Stats.Where(s => s.StatType == 0)
.GroupBy(s => s.UserName)
.Select(x => new { Correct = x.Column1
, Incorrect = x.Column2
, User=x.UserName})
.ToList()

The following should do the trick:
Stats.Where(s => s.StatType == 0)
.GroupBy(s => s.UserName)
.Select(x => new { Correct = x.Sum(y => y.Column1),
Incorrect = x.Sum(y => y.Column2),
User = x.Key})
.ToList();
Please note that GroupBy returns an IEnumerable<IGrouping<TKey, TValues>>.
That means that the x inside the Select is an IGrouping<TKey, TValues>. That in turn is basically just an IEnumerable<T> that contains all rows of that group along with the key of this group.
So, to get the sum of all items in a group, you need to use Sum on the grouping and specify which columns to sum as a parameter to the Sum method.

Related

Getting null data when executing LINQ to Entities query

I have the following Book table:
From this table, I am trying to get the latest registrationNumber based on the group ID as an input from the user.
So, my query looks like this at the moment:
var booksQuery = _context.Books.Where(g => g.GroupId == id)
.OrderByDescending(g => g.RegistrationNumber).GroupBy(g => g.GroupId);
id is the group Id specified by the user. So for example, if id = 15, then I should get the 15:6 as my latest registration number. To do that, I basically grouped by id and ordered the result by descending order. But that is giving me null results. Anyone know why? I am very new to this LINQ-Entitiy coding.
As mentioned by others you really should make your registrationNumber field an integer since you are wanting to sort on it. In the event, you can't make the change, below is a Linq query that basically parses the registration number and converts to an integer to sort on the first and second part by splitting at the colon. This works for sorting when you have 15:10, etc, as in the string sort 15:6 comes before 15:10
var booksQuery = books.Where(g => g.GroupId == id).ToList();
var bookWanted = booksQuery
.OrderByDescending(g => int.Parse(g.registrationNumber.Split(':')[0]))
.ThenByDescending(g=> int.Parse(g.registrationNumber.Split(':')[1]))
.FirstOrDefault();

Lambda Distinct not working

I am unable to get a distinct list of 'Order' from my Lambda query. Even though am using the keyword Distinct() it is still returning repeated select list item.
public ActionResult Index()
{
var query = _dbContext.Orders
.ToList()
.Select(x => new SelectListItem
{
Text = x.OrderID.ToString(),
Value = x.ShipCity
})
.OrderBy(y => y.Value)
.Distinct();
ViewBag.DropDownValues = new SelectList(query, "Text", "Value");
return View();
}
Any suggestions please?
UPDATE
Sorry guys I genuinely missed out the Distinct() from my code. I have now added it to my code.
I am basically trying to get all distinct rows where yes the values are same but the ids are different.
Same as this SQL Query......
SELECT distinct [ShipCity] FROM [northwind].[dbo].[Orders] ORDER by ShipCity
I'm assuming you removed your distinct from the end of the query.
Actually for that matter i don't see how you could get duplicate orders at all since you're doing nothing in your query except selecting and your query is on a table in a database, so you already can't get the same row multiple time.
What do you call a "duplicate"? If you mean two rows with the same values except their ID that's not a duplicate at all, that's just two unrelated rows, with the same values . . .
If on the other hand you mean you expect them to be equal because you're tossing the .Distinct after the select and you're only using OrderId and ShipCity in there for which there are duplicates (and i really don't see why a column named OrderId in an orders table should have duplicates but that's another issue) then that still won't work because you're NOT selecting OrderId nor ShipCity, you're selecting a new SelectListItem and if you create two reference types with the same value, they're not equal in .NET, they need to be the same instance to be equal, not two instances with different values.
edited following your comment :
var query = _dbContext.Orders
.ToList()
// Group them by what you want to "distint" on
.GroupBy(item=>item.ShipCity)
// For each of those groups grab the first item, we just faked a distinct)
.Select(item=>item.First())
.Select(x => new SelectListItem
{
Text = x.OrderID.ToString(),
Value = x.ShipCity
})
.OrderBy(y => y.Value)
.Distinct();

Linq to get data from a table but not if in another table?

Because of a poor design on our database I have to write a complex query to get my data.
I need to get all valid data from a table_1. In other works I need to get each valid row of my table_1. I don't have a simple valid or invalid column in my table_1. This information is stored in a table_2. Table_2 contains all invalid row with the error message.
Let say the data I need to retrieve are orders. For my example notice that OrderNo is the number of an order. So I can have multiple line, version, of this order in table_1 and I can also have multiple line of error on this order in table_2. So I will also have to use a version number.
I already tried this:
table_1.Where(y => (y.OrderNo == "1234"));
table_2.Where(y => (y.OrderNo == "1234")).Select(y => y.Version).Distinct();
And I think I need to do something like this:
var errorList = table_2.Where(y => (y.OrderNo == "1234")).Select(y => y.Version).Distinct();
table_1.Where(y => (y.OrderNo == "1234" && y.Version.NOT_IN(erriList)));
Could you help me?
I suppose you are searching for Contains function with ! symbol (logical negation operator). Like this:
var errorList = table_2.Where(y => y.OrderNo == "1234")
.Select(y => y.Version);
var res = table_1.Where(y => y.OrderNo == "1234"
//here you get only rows that doesn't represent in errorList
&& !errorList.Contains(y.Version));
to get data from a table but not if in another table
This is called antijoin. While you can use Contains and Any based approaches presented in the other answers, usually you'll get the best performance by using the classic SQL approach - LEFT OUTER JOIN combined with checking the right side for NULL.
Which in LINQ looks like this:
var query =
from t1 in table_1
//where t1.OrderNo == "1234"
join t2 in table_2 on t1.OrderNo equals t2.OrderNo into t2group
from t2 in t2group.DefaultIfEmpty()
where t2 == null
select t1;
Actually when you use OrderNo filter, most probably there will not be a noticeable speed difference between this and other queries. The main benefit of the above would be if you remove that filter, although many nowadays SQL query optimizers are able to derive one and the same execution plan regardless of whether the query uses JOIN / IN / EXISTS constructs.
How about this:
var validRows = table1
.Where(t1 => !table2
.Any(t2 => t1.OrderNo == t2.OrderNo &&
t1.Version == t2.Version));
Note that this is far more efficient in SQL unless you're using something fancy that translates the expression to SQL.

LINQ SQL Select from list using partial match

I have a list wbsList containing the current elements:
SS-B23813
SS-B23814
I want the SQL lookup to retreive all wbs elements that starts with those numbers to be listed, so I use this code:
var q =
from a in MESdb.GetTable<t_SAP_Order>()
where wbsList.Contains(a.WbsElement)
orderby a.WbsElement, a.OrderDescription
select a;
This results in nothing, because it only shows exact matches. All my wbs'es has a longer string (SS-B23813-24-1-15-06-100)
How can I use the list as a partial search criteria?
UPDATE:
When I change the code to Dunth's answer, I get the following error:
Local sequence cannot be used in LINQ to SQL implementations of query operators except Contains operator.
I wonder if this error comes because of some error when I try to display the result in a datagrid:
caseGrid.DataSource = q.Select(o => new
{
Workcenter = o.MainWorkCenter,
SO = o.Ordr,
Description = o.OrderDescription,
SerialNumber = o.SerialNumber,
BasicFinish = o.BasicFin
}).ToList();
Try this to find where it might not be at the start.
var q = MESdb.GetTable<t_SAP_Order>()
.Where(a => wbsList.Any(b => a.WbsElement.Contains(b)))
.OrderBy(a => a.WbsElement)
.ThenBy(a => a.OrderDescription).ToList();
Contains does a sql IN(...), you want a sql LIKE so use wbList.StartsWith(a.WbsElement)

How to write an linq statement to get the last of a group of records

I have 2 SQL statements that basically do the same thing, that is, retrieve the last record from a table based on a datetime field for a group of records. I am using the data-first Entity Framework model. How would I write either of these SQL statements using LINQ Lambda functions?
ie,
var u = db.AccessCodeUsage.Where(...).GroupBy(...)
rather than
var u = from a in db.AccessCodeUsage
where ...
group by ...
SQL Statements:
SELECT *
FROM AccessCodeUsage a
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM AccessCodeUsage
WHERE LocationId = a.LocationId
AND Timestamp > a.Timestamp)
SELECT a.*
FROM AccessCodeUsage a
WHERE a.Timestamp =
(SELECT MAX(Timestamp)
FROM AccessCodeUsage
WHERE a.LocationId = LocationId
AND a.AccessCode = AccessCode
GROUP By LocationId, AccessCode)
If you need to have the method-call form, but are finding it tricky to work out, then use the other syntax first:
from a in db.AccessCodeUsage
orderby a.TimeStamp descending
group a by a.LocationId into grp
from g in grp select g.First();
Then convert to method calls by taking each clause one at a time:
db.AccessCodeUsage
.OrderByDescending(a => a.TimeStamp)
.GroupBy(a => a.LocationId)
.Select(g => g.First());
From which I can workout the second without bothering to write out the linq-syntax form first:
db.AccessCodeUsage
.OrderByDescending(a => a.TimeStamp)
.GroupBy(a => new {a.LocationId, a.AccessCode})
.Select(g => g.First());
(Except it doesn't include what may be a bug, in that if timestamps aren't guaranteed unique, the SQL given in the question could include some extra inappropriate results).
I can't check on the SQL produced right now, but it should hopefully be equivalent in results (if not necessarily matching). There's cases where grouping doesn't translate to SQL well, but I certainly don't think this would be one.
I ended up using the following which corresponds to the first SQL statement.
// Retrieve only the latest (greatest value in timestamp field) record for each Access Code
var last = AccessCodeUsages.Where(u1 => !AccessCodeUsages
.Any(u2 => u2.LocationId == u1.LocationId &&
u2.AccessCode == u1.AccessCode &&
u2.Timestamp > u1.Timestamp));

Categories

Resources