I have no idea what the keywords are so here is an example of what I want:
return from i in userRepo.GetUsers()
select new SimpleUser{
i.UserId,
i.Name
};
userRepo.GetUsers() returns type IQueryable<User>. I'd like to convert this to IQueryable<SimpleUser> to I can restrict access to certain properties of the User domain.
How do I do this without hard coding the translation like this? What about tools like automapper or ValueInjecter, how can they do this?
Also, what is this technique called?
You must hardcode the translation or you must first convert it to IEnumerable. IQueryable represents expression tree translated to some execution in used provider - in your case I believe it will be Entity framework. You can't use any automatic mapping in such query because it will be translated to SQL which will not understand your .net methods or AutoMapper. Projections to custom types are part of the query and must be hardcoded. You can create custom extension method to IQueryable and reuse it where you need:
public static IQueryable<SimpleUser> ProjectToSimpleUser(this IQueryable<User> query)
{
return query.Select(u => new SimpleUser
{
// Here map your fields
});
}
Now you can use:
return repo.GetUsers().ProjectToSimpleUser();
In case of Entity framework SimpleUser mustn't be an mapped entity.
Provided that SimpleUser is assigneable to User (User is an interface of baseclass of SimpleUser), you can
var users = simpleUsers.Cast<User>();
optionally with
var users = simpleUsers.Cast<User>().AsQueryable();
And if you're not sure whether all items are actually Users, then you can use OfType<User> instead of Cast<User>
AutoMapper is the tool you want; it works via reflection and unless you tell it to do otherwise, it will map properties with the same name directly.
Auto-mapping is the technique.
This question is 9 years old so idk if it existed then but for anyone searching now, using .FirstOrDefault() works if you pick a single user.
Related
I don't want to use '==', I want to use .Equals, this will allow me to do some more complicated stuff with generics.
At bare minimum I want to be able to execute this query without getting a NotSupportedException. I'd like to implement .Equals to work with a Guid just like it works with primitive types such as int, bool, and string. I've done similar stuff with NHibernate for implementing custom methods to build queries, and am hoping to be able to do the same with EF.
var id = Guid.NewGuid();
_dbContext.MyEntityType.Single(x => x.Id.Equals(id));
Guid does implement an Equals method already. In this case it's EF that doesn't support transforming your specific usage into SQL, so unless you plan on writing your own query provider, you can't make it understand how to translate that code. All you can do not write expressions that it doesn't know how to turn into SQL, which in this case means writing == in your expression (if that's what EF knows how to translate) rather than Equals.
Usually the distinction between LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Objects isn't much of an issue, but how can I determine which is happening?
It would be useful to know when writing the code, but I fear one can only be sure at run time sometimes.
It's not micro optimization to make the distinction between Linq-To-Sql and Linq-To-Objects. The latter requires all data to be loaded into memory before you start filtering it. Of course, that can be a major issue.
Most LINQ methods are using deferred execution, which means that it's just building the query but it's not yet executed (like Select or Where). Few others are executing the query and materialize the result into an in-memory collection (like ToLIst or ToArray). If you use AsEnumerable you are also using Linq-To-Objects and no SQL is generated for the parts after it, which means that the data must be loaded into memory (yet still using deferred execution).
So consider the following two queries. The first selects and filters in the database:
var queryLondonCustomers = from cust in db.customers
where cust.City == "London"
select cust;
whereas the second selects all and filters via Linq-To-Objects:
var queryLondonCustomers = from cust in db.customers.AsEnumerable()
where cust.City == "London"
select cust;
The latter has one advantage: you can use any .NET method since it doesn't need to be translated to SQL (e.g. !String.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(cust.City)).
If you just get something that is an IEnumerable<T>, you can't be sure if it's actually a query or already an in-memory object. Even the try-cast to IQueryable<T> will not tell you for sure what it actually is because of the AsQueryable-method. Maybe you could try-cast it to a collection type. If the cast succeeds you can be sure that it's already materialized but otherwise it doesn't tell you if it's using Linq-To-Sql or Linq-To-Objects:
bool isMaterialized = queryLondonCustomers as ICollection<Customer> != null;
Related: EF ICollection Vs List Vs IEnumerable Vs IQueryable
The first solution comes into my mind is checking the query provider.
If the query is materialized, which means the data is loaded into memory, EnumerableQuery(T) is used. Otherwise, a special query provider is used, for example, System.Data.Entity.Internal.Linq.DbQueryProvider for entityframework.
var materialized = query
.AsQueryable()
.Provider
.GetType()
.GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(EnumerableQuery<>);
However the above are ideal cases because someone can implement a custom query provider behaves like EnumerableQuery.
I had the same question, for different reasons.
Judging purely on your title & initial description (which is why google search brought me here).
Pre compilation, given an instance that implements IQueryable, there's no way to know the implementation behind the interface.
At runtime, you need to check the instance's Provider property like #Danny Chen mentioned.
public enum LinqProvider
{
Linq2SQL, Linq2Objects
}
public static class LinqProviderExtensions
{
public static LinqProvider LinqProvider(this IQueryable query)
{
if (query.Provider.GetType().IsGenericType && query.Provider.GetType().GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(EnumerableQuery<>))
return LinqProvider.Linq2Objects;
if (typeof(ICollection<>).MakeGenericType(query.ElementType).IsAssignableFrom(query.GetType()))
return LinqProvider.Linq2Objects;
return LinqProvider.Linq2SQL;
}
}
In our case, we are adding additional filters dynamically, but ran into issues with different handling of case-sensitivity/nullreference handling on different providers.
Hence, at runtime we had to tweak the filters that we add based on the type of provider, and ended up adding this extension method:
Using EF core in net core 6
To see if the provider is an EF provider, use the following code:
if (queryable.Provider is Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Query.Internal.EntityQueryProvider)
{
// Queryable is backed by EF and is not an in-memory/client-side queryable.
}
One could get the opposite by testing the provider against System.Linq.EnumerableQuery (base type of EnumerableQuery<T> - so you don't have to test generics).
This is useful if you have methods like EF.Functions.Like(...) which can only be executed in the database - and you want to branch to something else in case of client-side execution.
I have the following method in a data access class which uses entity framework:
public static IEnumerable<entityType> GetWhere(Func<entityType, bool> wherePredicate)
{
using (DataEntities db = new DataEntities())
{
var query = (wherePredicate != null)
? db.Set<entityType>().Where(wherePredicate).ToList()
: db.Set<entityType>().ToList();
return query;
}
}
This works fine when I use the entities across all layers... however I am trying to move to using a DTO class and I would like to do something like the following:
public static IEnumerable<EntityTypeDTO> GetWhere(Func<EntityTypeDTO, bool> wherePredicate)
{
//call a method here which will convert Func<EntityTypeDTO,bool> to
// Func<EntityType,bool>
using (DataEntities db = new DataEntities())
{
var query = new List<EntityType>();
if (wherePredicate == null)
{
query = db.Set<EntityType>().ToList();
}
else
{
query = (wherePredicate != null)
? db.Set<EntityType>().Where(wherePredicate).AsQueryable<EntityType>().ToList()
: db.Set<EntityType>().ToList();
}
List<EntityTypeDTO> result = new List<EntityTypeDTO>();
foreach(EntityType item in query)
{
result.Add(item.ToDTO());
}
return result;
}
}
Essentially I want a method which will convert Func to Func.
I think I have to break down the Func into an expression tree and then rebuild it somehow in the entityType?
I want to do this to allow the Presentation Layer to just pass the Expression queries?
Am I missing something basic or is there an easier design pattern that can pass a query from a DTO to a data access class without knowing the details of the query?
I have tried making the DTO inherit from the entity which doesn't seem to work either?
If there is a better design pattern that I am missing I would love a pointer and I can investigate from there...
Firstly I would suggest that you put a querying layer of your own in front of Entity Framework rather than allowing any arbitrary Func to be passed in because it will be very easy in the future to pass a Func that Entity Framework can not translate into a SQL statement (it can only translate some expressions - the basics are fine but if your expression calls a C# method, for example, then Entity Framework will probably fail).
So your search layer could have classes that you build up as criteria (eg. a "ContainsName" search class or a "ProductHasId" class) that are then translated into expressions in your search layer. This separates your app entirely from the ORM, which means that ORM details (like the entities or like the limitations of what Funcs can and can't be translated) don't leak out. There's lots out there that's been written about this some of arrangement.
One final note, though, if you are working close to the ORM layer, Entity Framework is very clever and you could probably get a long way without trying to translate your Func<dto, bool> to a Func<entity, bool>. For example, in the below code, accessing "context.Products" returns a "DbSet" and calling Select on it returns an IQueryable and calling Where on that also returns an IQueryable. Entity Framework will translate all of that into a single SQL statement so it won't pull all other Products into memory and then filter the ID on that memory set, it will actually perform the filtering in SQL even though the filter is operating on a projected type (which is equivalent to the DTO in your case) and not the Entity Framework entity -
var results = context.Products
.Select(p => new { ID = p.ProductID, Name = p.ProductName })
.Where(p => p.ID < 10)
.ToList();
The SQL executed is:
SELECT
[Extent1].[ProductID] AS [ProductID],
[Extent1].[ProductName] AS [ProductName]
FROM [dbo].[Products] AS [Extent1]
WHERE [Extent1].[ProductID] < 10
So, if you changed your code to get something like..
return context.Products
.Map<Product, ProductDTO()>()
.Where(productDtoWherePredicate)
.ToList();
.. then you might be just fine with the Funcs that you already have. I presume that you already have some sort of mapping functions to get from EF entities to DTOs (but if not then you might want to look into AutoMapper to help you out - which has support for "projections", which are basically IQueryable maps).
I am going to put this up as an answer.Thanks to Dan for the quick answer. Looking at what you are saying I can write a query/filter set of classes. for example, take the following code:
GetProducts().GetProductsInCategory().GetProductsWithinPriceRange(minPrice, maxPrice);
This code would run like so: Get Products would get all products in the table and the remaining functions would filter the results. if all queries run like this it may put a significant load on the Data Access Layer/ DB Server Connections... not sure.
or
An Alternate I will work on also is:
If each function creates a Linq expression, I could combine them like this: How do I combine multiple linq queries into one results set?
this may allow me to do this in a manner where I can return the filtered results set from the database.
Either way I am marking this as answered. I will update when I have more details.
Using
Visual Studio 2010
.Net Framework 4
C#
Linq to Entities
Issue
I would like to be able to apply Object Oriented Principles like DRY and SOLID to some Linq Projections. With compiled queries or passed parameters I can apply these to the rest of Linq successfully so far, just not in the projections.
Please let me know if this isn't possible, and I must choose one of my alternate solutions (described below), if it is possible then how, or if I am missing something and there is another alternative implementation that will satisfy the goal.
Details
At a high level I would like to be able to dynamically control the type used in a Linq Projection, either with a standard Linq Query or a CompiledQuery. I am using Linq to Entities in my examples and actual code, however the issue should be applicable to the core Linq.
Below are simplistic examples that are not dynamic and do not solve the issue. They are fixed to always use the FooUser for each type. What I would like to be able to do is dynamically control the type of user created in the projection all of which would be based on a common IUser interface. This would be or could be similar to how I can control what type the query filters on.
Alternate Solutions
I am trying to conform to DRY, SOLID, and also trying to avoid using an enum to deal which is a typical code smell. However in all my attempts and research I seem to have to fall to one of the following solutions.
Implement a query for each type
which are all the same except for
the type they filter on and the type
used int he projection. While this
violates DRY and OCP, I can
encapsulate this within a single
class and keep them close together
as complied queries. This will
require the class to change if I add
a new type or if how you query for
the data changes.
Implement a enum that has the types, and use a more generalized User class that has its type as a property. However this will cause me to have to use the enum in several locations and introduce long case statements to handle them, which I would like to avoid.
I would love not to have to choose between different evils, and have an implementation that can conform to all SOLID principles and DRY. However if I must I think I will end up with the first or a version of it.
Examples
Standard Simple Linq Query
using (MyEntities context = new MyEntities())
{
var results = from u in context.Users
where u.UserType == type
select new FooUser
{
Id = u.UserID,
Name = u.UserName,
Location = u.UserLocation
};
}
Compiled Version of the Above Query
private static readonly Func<MyEntities, int, IQueryable<FooUser>> query = CompiledQuery.Compile<MyEntities, int, IQueryable<FooUser>>(
(context, type) => from u in context.Users
where u.UserType == type
select new FooUser
{
Id = u.UserID,
Name = u.UserName,
Location = u.UserLocation
});-
I found a way to do this with a standard method call. I haven't figured out how to do it with a compiled query, it doesn't look likely.
I was not aware of the Constructor Constraint I on the where statement for a generic. This can suit my needs. I would love to do this with a compiled query, but can live happy with this solution.
public IQueryable<IUser> FooMethod<T>(int type) where T : IUser, new()
{
using (MyEntities context = new MyEntities())
{
var results = from u in context.users
where u.usertype == type
select new T
{
id = u.UserId,
name = u.UserName,
location = u.Userlocation
};
return results;
}
}
I chose to post an answer instead of deleting the question for two reasons, one in case others are looking for something similar it could be helpful. Then of course I could be way off base and its is always fun to have people shoot holes in things and see what better stuff we can come up with.
I have a couple of areas in an application I am building where it looks like I may have to violate the living daylights out of the DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle. I'd really like to stay dry and not get hosed and wondered if someone might be able to offer me a poncho. For background, I am using C#/.NET 3.51 SP1, Sql Server 2008, and Linq-to-Sql.
Basically, my situations revolve around the following scenario. I need to be able to retrieve either a filtered list of items from virtually any table in my database or I need to be able to retrieve a single item from any table in my database given the id of the primary key. I am pretty sure that the best solutions to these problems will involve a good dose of generics and/or reflection.
Here are the two challenges in a little more depth. (Please forgive the verbosity.)
Given a table name (or perhaps a pluralized table name), I would like to be able to retrieve a filtered list of elements in the table. Specifically, this functionality will be used with lookup tables. (There are approximately 50 lookup tables in this database. Additional tables will frequently be added and/or removed.) The current lookup tables all implement an interface (mine) called IReferenceData and have fields of ID (PK), Title, Description, and IsActive.
For each of these lookup tables, I need to sometimes return a list of all records. Other times I need to only return the active records. Any Linq-to-Sql data context automatically contains a List property for each and every TableName. Unfortunately, I don't believe I can use this in it's raw form because it is unfiltered, and I need to apply a filter on the IsActive property.
One option is to write code similar to the following for all 50 tables. Yuk!!!
public List<AAA> GetListAAA(bool activeOnly)
{
return AAAs.Where(b => b.IsActive == true || b.IsActive == activeOnly).OrderBy(c => c.Title).ToList();
}
This would not be terribly hard, but it does add a burden to maintenance.
Note: It is important that when the list is returned that I maintain the underlying data type. The records in these lookup tables may be modified, and I have to apply the updates appropriately.
For each of my 150 tables, I need to be able to retrieve an individual record (FirstOrDefault or SingleOrDefault) by its primary key id. Again, I would prefer not to write this same code many times. I would prefer to have one method that could be used for all of my tables.
I am not really sure what the best approach would be here. Some possibilities that crossed my mind included the following. (I don't have specific ideas for their implementation. I am simply listing them as food for thought.)
A. Have a method like GetTableNameItemByID (Guid id) on the data context. (Good)
B. Have an extension method like GetItem(this, string tableName, Guid id) on the data context. (Better)
C. Have a Generic method or extension method like GetItem (this, Table, Guid id). (I don't even know if this possible but it would be the cleanest to use.) (Best)
Additional Notes
For a variety of reasons, I have already created a partial class for my data context. It would certainly be acceptable if the methods were included in that partial class either as normal methods or in a separate static class for extension methods.
Since you already have a partial implementation of your data context, you could add:
public IQueryable<T> GetList<T>( bool activeOnly ) where T : class, IReferenceData
{
return this.GetTable<T>()
.Where( b => !activeOnly || b.isActive )
.OrderBy( c => c.Title );
}
Retaining the IQueryable character of the data will defer the execution of the query until you are ready to materialize it. Note that you may want to omit the default ordering or have separate methods with and without ordering to allow you to apply different orderings if you desire. If you leave it as an IQueryable, this is probably more valuable since you can use it with paging to reduce the amount of data actually returned (per query) if you desire.
There's a design pattern for your needs called "Generic Repository" .Using this pattern you'll get an IQueryable instead of a real list of your entities which lets you do some other stuff with your query as you go.The point is to let the business layer gets whatever it needs whenever it needs it in a generic approach.
You can find an example here.
Have you considered using a code generation tool? Have a look at CodeSmith. Using a tool like that or T4 will allow you to generate your filter functions automatically and should make them fairly easy to maintain.
I'm not sure the best link to provide for T4, but you could start with this video.
Would this meet your needs?
public static IEnumerable<T> GetList<T>(this IEnumerable<IReferenceData> items, bool activeOnly)
{
return items.Where(b => b.IsActive == true || b.IsActive == activeOnly).OrderBy(c => c.Title).Cast<T>().ToList();
}
You could use it like this:
IEnumerable<IReferenceData> yourList;
List<DerivedClass> filtered = yourList.GetList<DerivedClass>(true);
To do something like this without demanding interfaces etc, you can use dynamic Expressions; something like:
public static IList<T> GetList<T>(
this DataContext context, bool activeOnly )
where T : class
{
IQueryable<T> query = context.GetTable<T>();
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T), "row");
if(activeOnly)
{
var predicate = Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>>(
Expression.Equal(
Expression.PropertyOrField(param, "IsActive"),
Expression.Constant(true,typeof(bool))
), param);
query = query.Where(predicate);
}
var selector = Expression.Lambda<Func<T, string>>(
Expression.PropertyOrField(param, "Title"), param);
return query.OrderBy(selector).ToList();
}