We Keep Coding

How do I tell EF Core about two properties of the same type?

I have a set of models representing legal cases. One of the actions a user can do on a case is generate a document. This action is saved as a History entity, with an associated HistoryFile entity that contains the data about the file. Other actions may result in a History entity, with zero or multiple associated HistoryFile entities.
Cut-down versions of these two classes looks like this...
public class History {
public int Id { get; set; }
public ObservableCollection<HistoryFile> HistoryFiles { get; set; }
}
public class HistoryFile {
public int Id { get; set; }
public int HistoryId { get; set; }
public History History { get; set; }
}
The next requirement is that a user can pick up on a document that was previously generated and continue working on it. The bit where I'm getting stuck is that the HistoryFile entity needs a reference back to the History entity that held the previous version. This means that I need to add two lines of code to the HistoryFile entity...
public class HistoryFile {
public int Id { get; set; }
public int HistoryId { get; set; }
public History History { get; set; }
public int? PreviousHistoryId { get; set; }
public virtual History PreviousHistory { get; set; }
}
This means that there are two links from a HistoryFile to a History, one required one which is the parent History entity (via the History property) and an optional one via the PreviousHistory property.
I can't work out how to set this up for EF Core. As the code stands now, when I try to add a migration, I get the following error...
Cannot create a relationship between 'History.HistoryFiles' and 'HistoryFile.PreviousHistory' because a relationship already exists between 'History.HistoryFiles' and 'HistoryFile.History'. Navigation properties can only participate in a single relationship. If you want to override an existing relationship call 'Ignore' on the navigation 'HistoryFile.PreviousHistory' first in 'OnModelCreating'.
I tried adding the following to my DbContext...
builder.Entity<HistoryFile>(entity => {
entity.HasOne(hf => hf.History)
.WithMany(h => h.HistoryFiles)
.HasForeignKey(hf => hf.HistoryId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict);
entity.HasOne(hf => hf.PreviousHistory)
.WithMany(h => h.HistoryFiles)
.HasForeignKey(hf => hf.PreviousHistoryId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict);
});
...but it didn't make any difference.
Anyone able to tell me how I configure this so that EF Core knows that there are two distinct links between the two entities?
I'm using EF Core 5.0.7 in a .NET5 project in case it makes a difference.
Thanks

Got it.
I needed to add the following two lines to the History class...
public virtual ICollection<HistoryFile> HistoryFilesParentHistory { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<HistoryFile> HistoryFilesPreviousHistory { get; set; }
...and then change the code I added to the DbContext to look like this...
builder.Entity<HistoryFile>(entity => {
entity.HasOne(hf => hf.History)
.WithMany(h => h.HistoryFilesParentHistory)
.HasForeignKey(hf => hf.HistoryId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict);
entity.HasOne(hf => hf.PreviousHistory)
.WithMany(h => h.HistoryFilesPreviousHistory)
.HasForeignKey(hf => hf.PreviousHistoryId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict);
});
This worked fine.

Entity Framework Many to Many - Cannot get data

I have introduced a many to many relationship between two of my existing tables. For this, I have added a third table, which contains only the Ids of the other two tables.
Since I am using EF, I have also added
public virtual List<EntityOne> EntityOnes in EntityTwo
and
public virtual List<EntityTwo> EntityTwos in EntityOne.
However, with this, when I get the EntityTwo object, it does not contain the associated EntityOne object. The list has a count of zero, even though the data is there in the tables.
Am I missing something here? Is there anything else, I need to do?
Not sure,if this is relevant, but I have also this in OnModelCreation
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<EntityOne>().
HasMany(p => p.EntityTwos).
WithMany(a => a.EntityOnes).
Map(
m =>
{
m.MapLeftKey("EntityTwoId");
m.MapRightKey("EntityOneId");
m.ToTable("EntityRelations");
});
////Make sure a context is not created by default.
}

Try this:
public partial class One
{
[Key, DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
public virtual int Id { get; set; }
private ICollection<OneTwo> _oneTwos;
public virtual ICollection<OneTwo> OneTwos
{
get { return _oneTwos ?? (_oneTwos = new List<OneTwo>()); }
set { _oneTwos = value; }
}
}
public partial class Two
{
[Key, DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
public virtual int Id { get; set; }
private ICollection<OneTwo> _oneTwos;
public virtual ICollection<OneTwo> OneTwos
{
get { return _oneTwos ?? (_oneTwos = new List<OneTwo>()); }
set { _oneTwos = value; }
}
}
Add navigation properties to the join class:
public partial class OneTwo
{
public virtual int OneId { get; set; }
public virtual int TwoId { get; set; }
public virtual One One { get; set; }
public virtual Two Two { get; set; }
}
Add composite key to the join class and configure relationships:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<OneTwo>() // composite primary key
.HasKey(p => new { p.OneId, p.TwoId });
modelBuilder.Entity<OneTwo>()
.HasRequired(a => a.One)
.WithMany(c => c.OneTwos)
.HasForeignKey(fk => fk.OneId)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
modelBuilder.Entity<OneTwo>()
.HasRequired(a => a.Two)
.WithMany(c => c.OneTwos)
.HasForeignKey(fk => fk.TwoId)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
// TODO: handle orphans when last asociation is deleted
}
An alternative strategy is to configure EF relationships via EntityTypeConfiguration<>. The following many-to-many relationship implementation demonstrates that approach:
City.cs
public partial class City
{
public virtual int Id { get; set; }
private ICollection<CountyCity> _countiesCities;
public virtual ICollection<CountyCity> CountiesCities
{
get { return _countiesCities ?? (_countiesCities = new List<CountyCity>()); }
set { _countiesCities = value; }
}
}
County.cs
public partial class County
{
public virtual int Id { get; set; }
private ICollection<CountyCity> _countiesCities;
public virtual ICollection<CountyCity> CountiesCities
{
get { return _countiesCities ?? (_countiesCities = new List<CountyCity>()); }
set { _countiesCities = value; }
}
}
CountyCity.cs
public partial class CountyCity
{
public virtual int CountyId { get; set; }
public virtual int CityId { get; set; }
public virtual County County { get; set; }
public virtual City City { get; set; }
}
CountyCityConfiguration.cs (EF 6 implementation)
public class CountyCityConfiguration : IEntityTypeConfiguration<CountyCity>
{
public void Map(EntityTypeBuilder<CountyCity> builder)
{
// Table and Schema Name declarations are optional
//ToTable("CountyCity", "dbo");
// composite primary key
builder.HasKey(p => new { p.CountyId, p.CityId });
builder.HasOne(pt => pt.County)
.WithMany(p => p.CountiesCities)
.HasForeignKey(pt => pt.CountyId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict);
builder.HasOne(pt => pt.City)
.WithMany(t => t.CountiesCities)
.HasForeignKey(pt => pt.CityId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict);
// TODO: handle orphans when last association is deleted
}
}
Entity Framework 6 Implementations:
You may configure the composite key and relationships using EntityTypeConfiguration<> as the previous code demonstrates.
Entity Framework Core Implementations:
EntityTypeConfiguration<> has not yet been migrated. However, it is on the roadmap for the next release.
In the meantime, you can employ the temporary pattern suggested by the EF team, or one of the patterns discussed this rather lengthy StackOverflow post discussing entity configuration in Entity Framework 7.
I implemented the pattern posted by Cocowalla in the lengthy discussion prior to reading the EF Team post. The source code for my workaround is available in this GitHub repository.
IEntityTypeConfiguration.cs
namespace Dna.NetCore.Core.DAL.EFCore.Configuration.Temporary.Cocowalla
{
// attribute: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26957519/ef-7-mapping-entitytypeconfiguration/35373237#35373237
public interface IEntityTypeConfiguration<TEntityType> where TEntityType : class
{
void Map(EntityTypeBuilder<TEntityType> builder);
}
}
Here is my implementation of that pattern:
namespace Dna.NetCore.Core.DAL.EFCore.Configuration.Common
{
public class StateOrProvinceConfiguration : IEntityTypeConfiguration<StateOrProvince>
{
public void Map(EntityTypeBuilder<StateOrProvince> builder)
{
// EF Core
builder.HasOne(p => p.Country).WithMany(p => p.StateOrProvinces).HasForeignKey(s => s.CountryId).OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Cascade);
builder.HasMany(d => d.Cities).WithOne().OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Cascade);
builder.HasMany(d => d.Counties).WithOne().OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Cascade);
}
}
}

Fluent NHibernate: One to One Mapping - reverse from primary column to a foreign key

I have a "Group" class and a "GroupSummaryLevel" class, codes are given below. There is a one-to-one relation between these entities in DB. I need the "GroupSummaryLevel" as a property in Groups class. It is supposed to be a very simple join like
(SELECT g.Id FROM GroupSummaryLevel g WHERE g.AcctGroup = GroupID)
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to figure this out how to do with NHibernate. The many answers I saw here is no help to me. I would appreaciate any inputs from the more experienced NHibernate users out there. Thanks in advance.
public class Group : DomainEntity
{
public virtual string GroupId { get; set; }
public virtual string GroupName { get; set; }
public virtual GroupSummaryLevel GroupSummaryLevel { get; set; }
}
public class GroupSummaryLevel : DomainEntity
{
public virtual int Id { get; set; }
public virtual string AcctGroup { get; set; }
public virtual GroupSummaryLevel Parent { get; set; }
public virtual IList<GroupSummaryLevel> Children { get; set; }
public GroupSummaryLevel()
{
Children = new List<GroupSummaryLevel>();
}
}
The mapping I have done did not work so far. My mapping codes are as below:
public GroupMap()
{
Table("Groups");
LazyLoad();
Id(x => x.GroupId).GeneratedBy.Assigned().Column("GroupID").CustomType<TrimmedString>();
Map(x => x.GroupName).Column("GroupName").CustomType<TrimmedString>().Not.Nullable();
HasOne(x => x.GroupSummaryLevel).Cascade.None().ForeignKey("AcctGroup");
}
public GroupSummaryLevelMap()
{
Table("GroupSummaryLevel");
LazyLoad();
Id(x => x.Id).GeneratedBy.Identity().Column("Id");
Map(x => x.AcctGroup).Column("AcctGroup").CustomType<TrimmedString>().Not.Nullable();
//References(x => x.Parent).Column("ParentId");
//HasMany(x => x.Children).Cascade.All().KeyColumn("ParentId");
}
Note: I also need to do a self-join for GroupSummaryLevel, and no success with that either. Any recommendations for that will also be appreciated :)

I would say, that your one-to-one is not driven by primary/foreign keys, but by property-ref. So the Group should map the summary by saying something like this:
...if you want to find related SummaryLevel, pass my <id> into column mapped as AcctGroup
public GroupMap()
{
...
HasOne(x => x.GroupSummaryLevel)
.Cascade.None()
//.ForeignKey("AcctGroup")
.PropertyRef(gsl => gsl.AcctGroup)
;
}
public GroupSummaryLevelMap()
{
...
//References(x => x.Parent).Column("ParentId");
//HasMany(x => x.Children).Cascade.All().KeyColumn("ParentId");
References(x => x.Parent, "AcctGroup");
}
NOTEs for completeness, as discussed in comments:
In this scenario, when the "child" has reference to parent - it really calls for one-to-many/.HasMany() mapping.
The down side is, that child is represented as a colleciton of children: IList<GroupSummaryLevel>. It is not as straighforward to use, but we can create some virtual property, returning the .FirstOrDefault(). The benefit we get - is lazy loading (not in place with one-to-one).

Many entities to one junction table NHibernate modelling

I would like to be able to add a collection of Notes to any of my main entities in my NHibernate application. I can see how you could do this with a seperate junction table per entity. However, I would like to be able to avoid this and only have one junction table - if this is possible.
Below is the code so far, however this will result in all Notes being loaded for every Entity and I only want to load the notes for that particular entity. What are the alternative approaches I need to take?
public class Entity
{
public virtual int Id { get; set; }
}
public class EntityType1 : Entity
{
public EntityType1()
{
Notes = new List<Note>();
}
public virtual string EntityTypeName { get; set; }
public virtual IList<Note> Notes {get;set;}
}
public class EntityType2 : Entity
{
public EntityType2()
{
Notes = new List<Note>();
}
public virtual string EntityType2Name { get; set; }
public virtual IList<Note> Notes { get; set; }
}
public class Note
{
public virtual int Id { get; set; }
public virtual IList<Entity> Entities { get; set; }
public virtual string NoteText { get; set; }
}
}
namespace FluentNHib.Mappings
{
public class EntityMap : ClassMap<Entity>
{
public EntityMap()
{
Id(m => m.Id);
}
}
public class EntityType1Map : ClassMap<EntityType1>
{
public EntityType1Map()
{
Id(m => m.Id);
Map(m => m.EntityTypeName1);
HasManyToMany(m => m.Notes).Table("EntityToNotes")
.ParentKeyColumn("EntityId")
.ChildKeyColumn("NoteId")
.LazyLoad()
.Cascade.SaveUpdate();
}
}
public class EntityType2Map : ClassMap<EntityType2>
{
public EntityType2Map()
{
Id(m => m.Id);
Map(m => m.EntityType2ame);
HasManyToMany(m => m.Notes).Table("EntityToNotes")
.ParentKeyColumn("EntityId")
.ChildKeyColumn("NoteId")
.LazyLoad()
.Cascade.SaveUpdate();
}
}
public class NoteMap : ClassMap<Note>
{
public NoteMap()
{
Id(m => m.Id);
Map(m => m.NoteText);
}
}

I am not sure what the real issue is:
...however this will result in all Notes being loaded for every Entity and I only want to load the notes for that particular entity...
Is the issue in lazy loading? or in fact that Entity1 and Entity2 can have same ID, therefore the references are mixed? (I expect that and this should be part of the answer below)
Anyhow, I would say that we can achieve what you need: map the Note with just one table EntityToNotes. And that is good.
But, in general, I would descourage you from using the many-to-many. It is just my own feeling, experience. Below are some links with more explanation:
Am I doing many to many incorrectly when using fluent nhibernate?
NHibernate how do you map a crossreference table to a bag?
Nhibernate: How to represent Many-To-Many relationships with One-to-Many relationships?
Draft of the SOLUTION:
So, firstly we have to extend the table "EntityToNotes" with two columns
EntityToNoteId column - we need a primary key for new pairing object
Discriminator column
The Discriminator column will be used for (almost like a standard inheritance)
inserting Discriminator value during creation
filtering te IList<Notes> per Entity
These could be the pairing Entity (with an abstract base gathering the common stuff)
public abstract class EntityToNote<TEntity>
{
public abstract string Discriminator { get; set; }
public virtual TEntity Entity {get;set;}
public virtual Note Note {get;set;}
}
// the pairing objects
public class EntityType1ToNote : EntityToNote<EntityType1>
{
string _discriminator = "EntityType1"; // here we set the discriminator
public virtual string Discriminator
{
get { return _discriminator; }
set { _discriminator = value; }
}
...
// Similar for other pairing objects
The Entities will now be referencing lists of pairing objects
public class EntityType1 : Entity
{
public virtual IList<EntityType1ToNote> Notes {get;set;}
...
public class EntityType2 : Entity
{
public virtual IList<EntityType2ToNote> Notes { get; set; }
...
Here is snippet of the mapping (all other Entities will have usual mapping, including ClassMaps for EntityType1ToNote, EntityType2ToNote...)
public class EntityType1Map : ClassMap<EntityType1>
{
public EntityType1Map()
{
Id(m => m.Id);
Map(m => m.EntityTypeName1);
HasMany(m => m.Notes)
// this "table" setting is redundant, it will come from EntityType1ToNote
//.Table("EntityToNotes")
.KeyColumn("EntityId")
// here is the trick, that only related rows will be selected
.Where("Discriminator = 'EntityType1'")
.Cascade.AllDeleteOrphan();
}
}
As I tried to explain in the links provided, we gained this way a lot. Mostly the ability to use more columns on the pairing table - e.g. Discriminator (later we can have more columns like SortBy...) and we are able to use powerful searching with subqueries - see Query on HasMany reference
Also, in fact, the pairing could be mapped via the real inheritance... But the main point here is: Instead of many-to-many we introduced the pairing object and gained a lot

Difficulty Concerning EF Code First Fluent API, TPH, and Foreign Keys

I have two tables in my database. One is called Users, and the other is called Widgets. The Widgets table represents 3 entities in my code model. One of the entities, Widget, is a parent class for the other two entities, WidgetTypeA and WidgetTypeB. Both WidgetTypeA and WidgetTypeB have navigation properties to the User entity, which is persisted to the Users table in the database. I'm having trouble getting Code First to use the same foreign key for both the WidgetTypeA and WidgetTypeB entities (UserId). Does anyone know how to do this? It seems like it should be a common problem with Table Per Hierarchy mapping.
My entity classes are as follows:
public class Widget
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
class WidgetMap : EntityTypeConfiguration<Widget>
{
public WidgetMap()
{
ToTable("Widgets");
HasKey(w => w.Id);
Property(w => w.Id)
.HasDatabaseGeneratedOption(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity);
Property(w => w.Name)
.IsRequired()
.HasMaxLength(75)
.IsUnicode(true);
}
}
public class WidgetTypeA : Widget
{
public int UserId { get; set; }
public virtual User User { get; set; }
public string Color { get; set; }
public int DepthLevel { get; set; }
}
class WidgetTypeAMap : EntityTypeConfiguration<WidgetTypeA>
{
public WidgetTypeAMap()
{
Map(w => w.Requires("WidgetTypeId").HasValue(1));
HasRequired(w => w.User)
.WithMany(u => u.WidgetTypeAs)
.HasForeignKey(w => w.UserId)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
Property(w => w.Color)
.IsOptional()
.IsUnicode(true)
.HasMaxLength(75);
Property(w => w.DepthLevel)
.IsOptional();
}
}
public class WidgetTypeB : Widget
{
public int UserId { get; set; }
public virtual User User { get; set; }
}
class WidgetTypeBMap : EntityTypeConfiguration<WidgetTypeB>
{
public WidgetTypeBMap()
{
Map(w => w.Requires("WidgetTypeId").HasValue(2));
HasRequired(w => w.User)
.WithMany(u => u.WidgetTypeBs)
.HasForeignKey(w => w.UserId)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
}
}
public class User
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Username { get; set; }
public int Age { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<WidgetTypeA> WidgetTypeAs { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<WidgetTypeB> WidgetTypeBs { get; set; }
}
class UserMap : EntityTypeConfiguration<User>
{
public UserMap()
{
ToTable("Users");
HasKey(u => u.Id);
Property(u => u.Username)
.IsRequired()
.HasMaxLength(75)
.IsUnicode(true);
Property(u => u.Age)
.IsRequired();
}
}
At any rate, I keep getting the error
Invalid column name 'UserId1'
when I try to perform the following operations:
using (var entities = new MyEntities())
{
User u = new User
{
Username = "Frank",
Age = 14
};
entities.Users.Add(u);
entities.SaveChanges();
WidgetTypeA wa1 = new WidgetTypeA
{
Name = "0SDF81",
UserId = u.Id,
DepthLevel = 6
};
entities.WidgetTypeAs.Add(wa1);
entities.SaveChanges();
}
Not sure if this can be fixed or not. I can always specify a second UserId foreign key for the Widgets table, but that seems pointless. Perhaps there's a way to do this using Fluent API?

You cannot map properties defined in different derived entities to the same column. That is limitation in EF. If your WidgetTypeA has UserId property and your WidgetTypeB has UserId property they must be different columns in the database. It should work if you move both UserId and User properties from derived types to the parent Widget type.

I know its a long way late, but hopefully may help other readers.
Although Ladislav was correct that using a mapped Foreign Key is not supported in EF6, I did find a useful workaround.
It is possible to define a computed column specification whose expression simply refers to the original column. Userid in the description above. This can be used as the discriminator for the TPH mapping. With this approach, the column need not be persisted, but can be used for TPH, with the original column being available for use as a foreign key.