We Keep Coding

Can't find the foreign key using Join for method syntax

I have these two tables: Category (Parent) and Product (Children).
I could use inner join with LINQ query syntax. But with method syntax, I could not get. p. doesn't load CategoryID
var db = new NorthwindEntities();
var cats = db.Categories;
var prods = db.Products;
var catProducts1 = from c in db.Categories
join p in db.Products
on c.CategoryID equals p.CategoryID
select new { c.CategoryName, p.ProductName };
var catProducts2 = db.Categories
.Join(db.Products, c=>c.CategoryID,p=>p);

Below is the correct syntax of Join lamda syntax for your scenario:
var catProducts2 = db.Categories.Join(db.Products,
c => c.CategoryId,
p => p.CategoryID,
(c, p) => new { c.CategoryName, p.ProductName })
.Select(s => new { s.CategoryName, s.ProductName });
You can check the usage of above query at fiddle -- https://dotnetfiddle.net/C3N2I2

How to make this query with lambda expression in Entity Framework?

This is my SQL query:
select
m.Name, s.Time, t.TheaterNumber
from
Movies m
join
MovieSeanceTheaters mst on mst.MovieId = m.MovieID
join
Theaters t on t.ID = mst.TheaterId
join
Seances s on mst.SeanceId = s.ID
This is my attempt at a Linq query:
var result = (from m in _context.Movies
join mst in _context.MovieSeanceTheaters on m.ID equals mst.MovieId
join t in _context.Theaters on mst.TheaterId equals t.ID
join s in _context.Seances on mst.TheaterId equals s.ID
select new { Film = m.Name, Salon = t.Name, Seans = s.Time }
).ToList();
I made this attempt, but I want to make with lambda for instance:
var result = movieManager.GetAll().Where(x => x.MovieSeanceTheaters)....
I couldn't do that.

If I understand you correctly, you want to rewrite your query from query syntax to method syntax?
Here we are!
var result = _context.Movies
.Join(_context.MovieSeanceTheaters,
m => m.MovieID,
mst => mst.MovieID,
(m, mst) => new
{
m = m,
mst = mst
})
.Join(_context.Theaters,
temp0 => temp0.mst.TheaterID,
t => t.ID,
(temp0, t) =>
new
{
temp0 = temp0,
t = t
})
.Join(_context.Seances,
temp1 => temp1.temp0.mst.TheaterID,
s => s.ID,
(temp1, s) =>
new
{
Film = temp1.temp0.m.Name,
Salon = temp1.t.TheaterNumber,
Seans = s.Time
});
Looks ugly, doesn't it?
Most often, the method syntax is more compact and convenient. But in this case, leave it as is.

Linq SelectMany

Hi I am coding my way through the MS 101 linq examples.
The "JoinOperators" are giving me a hard time since I am trying to refactor the query expressions to lambda syntax and vice versa.
Anyway, on example 105 I see this query expression:
var supplierCusts =
from sup in suppliers
join cust in customers on sup.Country equals cust.Country into cs
from c in cs.DefaultIfEmpty() // DefaultIfEmpty preserves left-hand elements that have no matches on the right side
orderby sup.SupplierName
select new
{
Country = sup.Country,
CompanyName = c == null ? "(No customers)" : c.CompanyName,
SupplierName = sup.SupplierName
};
And I tried implementing it as a lambda this way:
// something is not right here because the result keeps a lot of "Join By" stuff in the output below
var supplierCusts =
suppliers.GroupJoin(customers, s => s.Country, c => c.Country, (s, c) => new { Customers = customers, Suppliers = suppliers })
.OrderBy(i => i.Suppliers) // can't reference the "name" field here?
.SelectMany(x => x.Customers.DefaultIfEmpty(), (x, p) => // does the DefaultIfEmpty go here?
new
{
Country = p.Country,
CompanyName = x == null ? "(No customers)" : p.CompanyName,
SupplierName = p // not right: JoinOperators.Program+Customer ... how do I get to supplier level?
});
For some reason I can't access the supplier-level information this way. When I switch out the customers with suppliers I can't access the customer-level information.
Is there some overload of SelectMany() that lets me pull from the field-level of both objects?
Also, I don't understand why the GroupJoin() appears to return an object with 2 collections (suppliers and customers). Isn't it supposed to join them somehow?
I guess I don't understand how GroupJoin() works.

You have wrong result selector in group join, that's where problems started. Here is fixed query:
var supplierCusts =
suppliers
.GroupJoin(customers,
sup => sup.Country,
cust => cust.Country,
(sup, cs) => new { sup, cs })
.OrderBy(x => x.sup.Name)
.SelectMany(x => x.cs.DefaultIfEmpty(), (x, c) =>
new
{
Country = x.sup.Country,
CompanyName = c == null ? "(No customers)" : c.CompanyName,
SupplierName = x.sup.Name
});

If you want to learn translating the query expressions into lambda's, I suggest you check out LinqPad which can do that by default. For example, your query is translated as follows:
Suppliers
.GroupJoin (
Customers,
sup => sup.Country,
cust => cust.Country,
(sup, cs) =>
new
{
sup = sup,
cs = cs
}
)
.SelectMany (
temp0 => temp0.cs.DefaultIfEmpty (),
(temp0, c) =>
new
{
temp0 = temp0,
c = c
}
)
.OrderBy (temp1 => temp1.temp0.sup.CompanyName)
.Select (
temp1 =>
new
{
Country = temp1.temp0.sup.Country,
CompanyName = (temp1.c == null) ? "(No customers)" : temp1.c.CompanyName,
SupplierName = temp1.temp0.sup.CompanyName
}
)
That being said, I typically find SelectMany to be easier to code and maintain using the query syntax instead of the lambda syntax.
The GroupJoin in this example is used to accomplish the left join (via the .DefaultIfEmpty clause).

Try this:
var supplierCusts =
suppliers.GroupJoin(customers, s => s.Country, c => c.Country, (s, c) => new { Supplier = s, Customers = c })
.OrderBy(i => i.Supplier.SupplierName)
.SelectMany(r => r.Customers.DefaultIfEmpty(), (r, c) => new
{
Country = r.Supplier.Country,
CompanyName = c == null ? "(No customers)" : c.CompanyName,
SupplierName = r.Supplier.SupplierName
});

Linq to SQL with GroupBy and Detail - Is there a better way to do this?

I have some SQL and am trying to make the equivalent in LINQ. This is the SQL:
SELECT Categories.CategoryDescription, Categories.CategoryType AS Type,
Categories.Category, COUNT(CategoryLinks.OrgID) AS CountOfOrgs
FROM CategoryLinks
INNER JOIN Categories ON Categories.CategoryID = CategoryLinks.CategoryID
GROUP BY Categories.Category, Categories.CategoryType, Categories.CategoryDescription
ORDER BY CategoryDescription ASC
Essentially, I want a list of everything from the Categories table and a count of the number of OrgId's in the CategoryLinks table that links to it.
Below is the query I am performing at the moment. There has to be a more efficient way to do this. Am I wrong?
var cnts = (from c in db.Categories
join cl in db.CategoryLinks on c.CategoryID equals cl.CategoryID
group new { c, cl } by new
{
c.CategoryID
} into g
select new
{
CategoryID = g.Key.CategoryID,
categoryCount = g.Count()
});
var results = (from c in db.Categories
join cn in cnts on c.CategoryID equals cn.CategoryID
select new
{
c.CategoryID,
c.CategoryDescription,
c.CategoryType,
Category = c.Category1,
cn.categoryCount
});

I think you want to use the GroupJoin method:
Categories.GroupJoin(
CategoryLinks,
x => x.CategoryID,
y => y.CategoryID,
(x,y) => new{
x.CategoryID,
x.CategoryDescription,
x.CategoryType,
Category = x.Category1,
CategoryCount = y.Count() })
In query syntax, this is written as join..into:
from c in db.Categories
join cl in db.CategoryLinks on c.CategoryID equals cl.CategoryID into catGroup
select new
{
c.CategoryID,
c.CategoryDescription,
c.CategoryType,
Category = c.Category1,
CategoryCount = catGroup.Count()
}

Try this:
var bbb = categories.Join(categoryLinks, c => c.CategoryID, cl => cl.CategoryId, (c, cl) => new {c, cl})
.GroupBy(g => g.c)
.Select(g => new {count = g.Count(), Category = g.Key});
It returns count and all data that is in Category. We group by all columns in category and place result in new anonymous type variable that contains 2 properties: Count, that contains count and Category that is of type Category and contains all data that is in category row.
If you want, you can rewrite it as:
var bbb = categories.Join(categoryLinks, c => c.CategoryID, cl => cl.CategoryId, (c, cl) => new {c, cl})
.GroupBy(g => g.c)
.Select(g => new
{
CategoryID = g.Key.CategoryId,
CategoryDescription = g.Key.CategoryDescription,
CategoryType = g.Key.CategoryType,
Category = g.Key.Category1,
categoryCount = g.Count()
});

what am i doing wrong in constructing Linq query

I am trying to write equivalent linq code for following query.
SELECT A.*
FROM
(
SELECT * FROM TableA
WHERE id = 100
) a
JOIN
(
SELECT Name, MAX(AnotherId) AnotherId
FROM TableA
WHERE id = 100
GROUP BY Name
) b
on a.Name = b.Name and a.AnotherId = b.AnotherId
This is the linq
var Collection = from R in DbContext.TableA
join G in (DbContext.TableA.Where(r => r.Id == 100).GroupBy(r => new { r.Name, r.AnotherId } ).Select(g => new { Name = g.Name , AnotherId = g.Max(o => o.AnotherId) }))
on new { R.Name, R.AnotherId } equals new { G.Name, G.AnotherId }
where R.Id == 100
select R;
But I am getting following compilation error that I don’t know how to fix. Any thoughts
The type of one of the expressions in the join clause is incorrect. Type inference failed in the call to 'Join'.
Error 7 'System.Linq.IGrouping' does not contain a definition for 'Name' and no extension method 'Name' accepting a first argument of type 'System.Linq.IGrouping' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)

You group by r.Name, r.AnotherId, when you just want to group by r.Name.
var Collection = from R in DbContext.TableA
join G in (DbContext.TableA
.Where(r => r.Id == 100)
.GroupBy(r => r.Name)
.Select(g => new { Name = g.Key , AnotherId = g.Max(o => o.AnotherId) }))
on new { R.Name, R.AnotherId } equals new { G.Name, G.AnotherId }
where R.Id == 100
select R;
And to have all in Fluent Syntax
var collection = DbContext.TableA
.Where(t1 => t1.Id == 100)
.Join(DbContext.TableA
.Where(t2 => t2.Id == 100)
.GroupBy(t2 => t2.Name)
.Select(group => new{Name = group.Key,
AnotherId = group.Max(e => e.AnotherId)})
),
t1 => new{t1.Name, t1.AnotherId} ,
t2 => new{t2.Name, t2.AnotherId},
(t1, t2) => t1);

llHi you need the following syntax, notice the addition of 'Key'
var Collection = from R in DbContext.TableA
join G in (DbContext.TableA.Where(r => r.Id == 100)
.GroupBy(r => new { r.Name, r.AnotherId } )
.Select(g => new { Name = g.Key.Name , AnotherId = g.Max(o => o.AnotherId) }))
on new { R.Name, R.AnotherId } equals new { G.Name, G.AnotherId }
where R.Id == 100
select R;

I would recommend using the query syntax for all parts of your query. By doing it this way, your linq query will have a more similar structure to your original sql query. It would look like this:
var query =
from a in
(from x in DbContext.TableA
where x.ID == 100
select x)
join b in
(from x in DbContext.TableA
where x.ID == 100
group x by x.Name into x
select new
{
Name = x.Key,
AnotherId = x.Max(o => o.AnotherId),
})
on new { a.Name, a.AnotherId } equals new { b.Name, b.AnotherId }
select a;

saj and Raphael both have found good points:
.GroupBy(r => new { r.Name, r.AnotherId } )
.Select(g => new { Name = g.Name , AnotherId = g.Max(o => o.AnotherId) }))
Groups don't have a Name. Each group has a Key (and the Key has a Name and AnotherId).
Since you want the Max(AnotherId), you don't want to include AnotherId in your grouping Key (same as it is not present in the GroupBy clause of the original query).
.GroupBy(r => r.Name) //the Name is the Key
.Select(g => new { Name = g.Key, AnotherId = g.Max(o => o.AnotherId) }))