Develop Reference

Making generic getters and setters

I have a problem where I have to get the column names and their values from all the Tables in my schema and show that the result in a grid.
I have used the direct approach for this but I have to implement the SqlSiphon structure. For this I have to make getters and setters of each of the column of each Table in the schema which is impossible.
What should I use to get the Column names and their values dynamically from the table.
SELECT * FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.COLUMNS
WHERE
TABLE_NAME = '" + #Tablename1 + "' AND TABLE_SCHEMA='dbo'"
What will be the best dynamic solution?
And what will be Best to use List , Dictionay or something like 2d Array which will give the column names as well as column values?

A few suggestions:
I'm not completely clear on what you're trying to achieve, but consider using an ORM (Linq2SQL, WEF, NHibernate)
In .NET, a suitable type to represent a database table would be a DataTable
Edit: After a few more re-reads I think I understand what you're asking - you already have a database/schema and you want to automatically create the entity classes needed by SqlSiphon. This is called "database-first" (as opposed to model-first). However, from a brief scan of the SqlSiphon documentation it appears it does not support database-first. Is this why you are trying to put the columns into a grid - to make it easier to manually create the entity classes for SqlSiphon?
Edit2: Note that trying to use an ORM on top of a database whose schema is frequently modified will be problematic. My next guess is that you're trying to figure out how to create an entity class in SqlSiphon which you can use to retrieve database schema information like table columns? I'm still struggling to understand what you're actually asking here - perhaps you can update your question?
Edit3: I think the answer to your question is take a different approach to your design - ORM's like SqlSiphon are not intended to be used to retrieve and modify the database schema itself.

Might be worth taking a step back an comparing against how other people solve similar problems.
Typically, each table on a database represents an entity, and you also have a class per entity, and you may use an ORM system to avoid duplication of work. So, in a typical system, you have a table for customers, and a table for invoices, and a table for invoice lines, etc. and then a class that represents a customer, a class for an invoice, a class for an invoice line, etc. As you later add functionality (and possible columns/properties) you change the classes, rather than just seeing what columns are on the database - you can of course decorate these with XML documentation and get Intelisense goodness.
There are many ORM systems out there, and each have their strengths and weaknesses, but I personally like LINQ to SQL for adding onto an existing data model.

Each row of a DataTable as a Class?

I have a "location" class. This class basically holds addresses, hence the term "location". I have a datatable that returns multiple records which I want to be "locations".
Right now, I have a "load" method in the "location" class, that gets a single "location" by ID. But what do I do when I want to have a collection of "location" objects from multiple datatable rows? Each row would be a "location".
I don't want to go to the database for each record, for obvious reasons. Do I simply create a new instance of a location class, assigning values to the properties, while looping through the rows in the datatable bypassing the "load" method? It seems logical to me, but I am not sure if this is the correct/most efficient method.

That is (your description) pretty much how a row (or a collection of rows) of data gets mapped to a C# biz object(s). But to save yourself a lot of work you should consider one of a number of existing ORM (object relational mapper) frameworks such as NHibernate, Entity Framework, Castle ActiveRecord etc.
Most ORMs will actually generate all the boilerplate code where rows and fields are mapped to your .NET object properties and vice-versa. (Yes, ORMs allow you to add, update and delete db data just as easily as retrieving and mapping it.) Do give the ORMs a look. The small amount of learning (there is some learning curve with each) will pay off very shortly. ORMs are also becoming quite standard and indeed expected in any application that touches an RDBMS.
Additionally these links may be of interest (ORM-related):
Wikipedia article on ORMs
SO Discussion on different ORMs
Many different .NET ORMs listed

You're on the right track, getting all the locations you need with one trip to the database would be best in terms of performance.
To make your code cleaner/shorter, make a constructor of your Location class that takes a DataRow, which will then set your properties accordingly. By doing this, you'll centralize your mapping from columns to properties in one place in your code base, which will be easy to maintain.
Then, it's totally acceptable to loop through the rows in your data table and call your constructor.
You could also use an object to relational mapper, like Entity Framework to do your database interaction.

Create a method that returns an IEnumerable . In this method do your database stuff and I often pass in the sqldatareader into the location constructor. So I would have something like this
public static IEnumerable<location> GetLocations()
{
List<location> retval = new List<location>();
using(sqlconnection conn = new sqlconn(connection string here);
{
sqlcommand command = new sqlcommand(conn, "spLoadData");
command.commandtype=stored proc
SqlDataReader reader = command.executereader();
while(reader.read())
{
retval.add(new location(reader));
}
}
return retval;
}
obviously that code won't work but it's just to give you an idea.
An ORM mapper could save you loads of time if you have lots to do however!

NHibernate Mapping Sanity Checks

Currently our new database design is changing rapidly and I don't always have time to keep up to date with the latest changes being made. Therefore I would like to create some basic integration tests that are basically sanity checks on my mappings against the database.
Here are a few of the things I'd like to accomplish in these tests:
Detect columns I have not defined in my mapping but exist in the database
Detect columns I have mapped but do NOT exist in the database
Detect columns that I have mapped where the data types between the database and my business objects no longer jive with each other
Detect column name changes between database and my mapping
I found the following article by Ayende but I just want to see what other people out there are doing to handle these sort of things. Basically I'm looking for simplified tests that cover a lot of my mappings but do not require me to write seperate queries for every business object in my mappings.

I'm happy with this test, that comes from the Ayende proposed one:
[Test]
public void PerformSanityCheck()
{
foreach (var s in NHHelper.Instance.GetConfig().ClassMappings)
{
Console.WriteLine(" *************** " + s.MappedClass.Name);
NHHelper.Instance.CurrentSession.CreateQuery(string.Format("from {0} e", s.MappedClass.Name))
.SetFirstResult(0).SetMaxResults(50).List();
}
}
I'm using plain old query since this version comes from a very old project and I'm to lazy to update with QueryOver or Linq2NH or something else...
It basically ping all mapped entities configured and grasp some data too in order to see that all is ok. It does not care if some field exists in the table but not on the mapping, that can generate problem in persistence if not nullable.
I'm aware that Fabio Maulo has something eventually more accurate.
As a personal consideration, if you are thinking on improvement, I would try to implement such a strategy: since mapping are browsable by API, look for any explicit / implicit table declaration in the map, and ping it with the database using the standard schema helperclasses you have inside NH ( they eventually uses the ADO.NET schema classes, but they insulate all the configuration stuff we already did in NH itself) By playng a little with naming strategy we can achieve a one by one table field check list. Another improvement can be done by, in case of unmatching field, looking for a candidate by applying Levensthein Distance to all the available names and choosing one if some threshold requisites are satisfied. This of course is useless in class first scenarios when the DB schema are generated by NH itself.

I use this one too:
Verifying NHibernate Entities Contain Only Virtual Members

How to create a business model wrapper for a generic database approach?

I'm currently facing a performance problem with creating POCO objects from my database. I'm using Entity Framework 4 as OR-Mapper.
The whole application is a prototype for now.
Let's assume I want to have some business objects like classes 'Printer' or 'Scanner'. Both classes inherit from a BaseClass called Product.
The business classes exist.
I try to use a more generic database approach. I don't want to create tables for "Printer" nor "Scanner". I want to have 3 tables: One called Product, and the other Property and PropertyValue (which stores all assigned values to a specific Product).
In my business layer I do create a specific object like this:
public Printer GetPrinter(int IDProduct)
{
Printer item = new Printer();
// get the product object with EF
// get all PropertyValues
// (with Reflection) foreach property in item.GetType().GetProperties
// {
// property.SetValue("specific value")
// }
return item;
}
This is how the EF model looks like:
Works fine so far. For now I'm doing performance tests for retrieving multiple sets.
I've created a prototype and improved it several times to increase the performance. It is still far away from being usable.
I takes 919ms to create 300 objects who only contain 3 properties.
The reason for choosing such DB design is to have a generic database design. Adding new properties should only be done in the business model.
Am I just being too stupid to create a performant way of retrieving xx objects or is my approach totally wrong? As far as I understand OR-Mapper, they are basically doing the same?

I think you missed whole point of ORM. The reason why people are using ORM is to be able to persist buisness objects and easily retrieve business objects. You are using ORM to get just data for your business objects' factories. Factories are using reflection to build business object from materialized classes retrieved by ORM. This will always be very slow because:
Query compilation is slow (you can precompile it)
Object materialization is slow (you can't avoid it)
Reflection is slow (you can't avoid it)
IMO if you want to follwo this DB design to have generic tables absolutely independent on your business objects you don't need ORM or at least you don't need EF.
The reason for your performance problems is that generic approach is not follwed in your business model. So you must somewhere convert generic data to specific data = slow operation.
If you want to improve performance define set of shared properties and place them into Product. Then either use your current PropertyValue and Property for additional non shared properties or use simply ExtendedProperties table storing key value pairs. Your entities will be of type Product with inner type property, shared properties and collection of extended properties. That is generic approach.

Firstly, it's not clear to me what you have in the way of POCOs. Did you hand code these and your context or T4 generate them? There are some great articles here that benchmark performance with no POCO, T4 Generated POCOs/Context and hand coded POCOs/Context. As expected there is HUGE performance savings going with POCOs (more than a 15-fold boost in performance in his benchmark) going the POCO route over those generated by the Entity Framework. You don't say what DBMS...if MSSQL have you turned on the profiler and see what's being generated?

NHibernate / Fluent NHibernate Dynamic Column Mapping

I have a table that, some of its columns are unknown at compile time. Such columns could either be of an integer value, or some Enum value. There is a table that holds all the names of such dynamic columns and also holds the column's type. This "metatable" has the following columns:
DynamicColumnId (Pk)
Name
TypeId (Integer / Enum, as Fk from a separate table)
Integer columns have the Name from this table, whereas Enum columns are Fk columns from a table that has that Name, with some modification (e.g. a "DynamicTable" prefix).
The only solution I could think of for this situation is using Reflection.Emit to dynamically create an Entity class and a corresponding Mapping class. Admittedly, I'm new to NHybernate / Fluent NHybernate and it seems like a relatively simple hierarchy between the tables, and so I wanted to verify my solution isn't as ugly as it initially appears...
I would also welcome solutions that completely disregard my table hierarchy, in order to effectively acheive the same results (that is, to enumerate the rows on the dynamic table, going over all the columns, with knowledge of whether they are Enums and, if they are, their possible values as well).
(Edit: Additional information re problem domain)
I initially included minimal details, as to avoid Too-Much-Info related confusion.
This description is much more complex, but it unravels the motives behind this design.
The application involved is designed to automate log/dump analysis. Analysis-scenarios are frequently provided by the log/dump experts and so, in order to streamline the typical process of requirements=>implementation=>verification cycle, such analysis-scenarios are implemented by the experts directly as an Iron Python code snippet, with some domain-specific constructs injected into the snippets' scope. Each snippet has a "context" for which it is relevant. An example of "context" could be "product," "version," etc... So, the snippet itself is only invoked in certain contexts - this helps simplifying the Python code by eliminating branching (you could view it as Aspect Oriented Programming, to some extent). A non-expert could use the application, with a given code-context database, to analyze a log/dump, after choosing values for the various contexts.
When an expert decides that a new context is required for cataloging a certain code snippet, he could add a context, indicating the possible values it could have. Once a new context is added to the database, a non-expert that runs an analysis will be given the option to choose a value for the newly-added context.
The "dynamic table" is the table that associates a code snippet with values of the various contexts (columns) that existed when the snippet was issued, plus default values for the columns that did not exist at that time.

I won't claim to fully understand your scenario, but it seems to me that you'd be better off using a key-value store such as Redis or a schema-less database like CouchDB instead of SQL. This doesn't seem to be a problem for a relational database, but if you really need to use a RDBMS I'd map NHibernate as closely as possible to the real schema (DynamicColumnId, Name, TypeId) then build whatever data structure you need on top of that.