Return Values That Are In Lowercase - c#

We recently discovered a bug in our system whereby any serial numbers that have been entered in lowercase have not been processed correctly.
To correct this, we need to add a one off function that will run through the database and re-process all items with lower case serial numbers.
In linq, is there a query I can run that will return a list of such items?
Note: I am not asking how to convert lowercase to uppercase or reverse, which is all google will return. I need to generate a list of all database entries where the serial number has been entered in lowercase.
EDIT: I am using Linq to MS SQL, which appears to be case insensitive.

Yes, there is. You can try something like this:
var result = serialnumber.Any(c => char.IsLower(c));
[EDIT]
Well, in case of Linq to Entities...
As is stated here: Regex in Linq (EntityFramework), String processing in database, there's few ways to workaround it.
Change database table structure. E.g. create table Foo_Filter which will link your entities to filters. And then create table Filters
which will contain filters data.
Execute query in memory and use Linq to Objects. This option will be slow, because you have to fetch all data from database to memory
Note: link to MSDN documentation has been added by me.
For example:
var result = context.Serials.ToList().Where(sn => sn.Any(c => char.IsLower(c)));
Another way is to use SqlMethods.Like Method
Finally, i'd strongly recommend to read this: Case sensitive search using Entity Framework and Custom Annotation

Related

LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'Int32 IndexOf(System.String, System.StringComparison)' method

I have executed a linq query by using Entityframework like below
GroupMaster getGroup = null;
getGroup = DataContext.Groups.FirstOrDefault(item => keyword.IndexOf(item.Keywords,StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)>=0 && item.IsEnabled)
when executing this method I got exception like below
LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'Int32 IndexOf(System.String, System.StringComparison)' method, and this
method cannot be translated into a store expression.
Contains() method by default case sensitive so again I need to convert to lower.Is there any method for checking a string match other than the contains method and is there any method to solve the indexOf method issue?
The IndexOf method Of string class will not recognized by Entity Framework, Please replace this function with SQLfunction or Canonical functions
You can also take help from here or maybe here
You can use below code sample:
DataContext.Groups.FirstOrDefault(item =>
System.Data.Objects.SqlClient.SqlFunctions.CharIndex(item.Keywords, keyword).Value >=0 && item.IsEnabled)
You really only have four options here.
Change the collation of the database globally. This can be done in several ways, a simple google search should reveal them.
Change the collation of individual tables or columns.
Use a stored procedure and specify the COLATE statement on your query
perform a query and return a large set of results, then filter in memory using Linq to Objects.
number 4 is not a good option unless your result set is pretty small. #3 is good if you can't change the database (but you can't use Linq with it).
numbers 1 and 2 are choices you need to make about your data model as a whole, or if you only want to do it on specific fields.
Changing the Servers collation:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179254.aspx
Changing the Database Collation:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179254.aspx
Changing the Columns Collation:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190920(v=sql.105).aspx
Using the Collate statement in a stored proc:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms184391.aspx
Instead you can use this method below for lowering the cases:
var lowerCaseItem = item.ToLower();
If your item is of type string. Then this might get you through that exception.
Erik Funkenbush' answer is perfectly valid when looking at it like a database problem. But I get the feeling that you need a better structure for keeping data regarding keywords if you want to traverse them efficiently.
Note that this answer isn't intended to be better, it is intended to fix the problem in your data model rather than making the environment adapt to the current (apparently flawed, since there is an issue) data model you have.
My main suggestion, regardless of time constraint (I realize this isn't the easiest fix) would be to add a separate table for the keywords (with a many-to-many relationship with its related classes).
[GROUPS] * ------- * [KEYWORD]
This should allow for you to search for the keyword, and only then retrieve the items that have that keyword related to it (based on ID rather than a compound string).
int? keywordID = DataContext.Keywords.Where(x => x.Name == keywordFilter).Select(x => x.Id).FirstOrDefault();
if(keywordID != null)
{
getGroup = DataContext.Groups.FirstOrDefault(group => group.Keywords.Any(kw => kw.Id == keywordID));
}
But I can understand completely if this type of fix is not possible anymore in the current project. I wanted to mention it though, in case anyone in the future stumbles on this question and still has the option for improving the data structure.

lightswitch LINQ PreprocessQuery

I use the PreprocessQuery method to extend a query in lightswitch.
Something like this:
query = (from item in query
where (validIDs.Contains(item.tableIDs.myID)) &&
elementCount[item.ID] <= maxEleCount)
select item);
Where validIDs is a HashSet(int) and elementCount is a Dictionary(int, int).
the first where clause is working fine, but the second -> elementCount[item.ID] <= maxEleCount
is not working.
What i want to do is to filter a table by some IDs (validIDs) and check also if in another table the number of entries for every of this IDs does not exceed a limit.
Any ideas?
EDIT
I found a solution. Instead of a Dictionary I also used a HashSet for the second where clause. It seems it is not possible to do the Dictionary lookup inside the LINQ statement for some reason (?)
First, although being a bit pedantic, what you're doing in a PreProcessQuery method is "restricting" records in the query, not "extending" the query.
What you put in a LING query has to be able to be processed by the Entity Framework data provider (in the case of LS, the SQL Server Data Provider).
Sometimes you'll find that while your LINQ query compiles, it fails at runtime. This is because the data provider is unable to express it to the data store (again in this case SQL Server).
You're normally restricted to "primitive" values, so if you hadn't said that using a Dictionary actually worked, I would have said that it wouldn't.
Any time you have a static (as in non-changing) value, I'd suggest that you create a variable outside of your LINQ query, then use the variable in the LINQ query. By doing this, you're simply passing a value, the data provider doesn't have to try to figure out how to pass it to the data store.
Reading your code again, this might not be what you're doing, but hopefully this explanation will still be helpful.

Search Substring on a Integer Value

Let's say we have a mongodb collection that has elements containing an int attribute value like: {"MyCollectionAttribute": 12345}
How can I search the string "234" inside the int using Query<T>. syntax?
For now it seems to work(as explained here) using raw query like:
var query = new QueryDocument("$where", "/234/.test(this.MyCollectionAttribute)");
myCollection.Find(query);
Is it preferable to store the values directly as strings instead of integers, since a regex match will be slow? How do you approach theese situations?
Edit
Context: a company can have some internal codes that are numbers. In sql server they can be stored as a column of int type in order to have data integrity at database level and then queried from linq to sql with something like:
.where(item => item.CompanyCode.ToString().Contains("234"))
In this way there is both data integrity at db level and type safety of the query.
I asked the question in order to see how this scenario can be implemented using mongodb.
Does not make much sense what you are asking.
Regular expressions are for search within strings and not within integers.
If you want to perform a substring search (for whatever reason) then store your numbers
as strings and not as integers - obviously.

Accessing foreign keys through LINQ

I have a setup on SQL Server 2008. I've got three tables. One has a string identifier as a primary key. The second table holds indices into an attribute table. The third simply holds foreign keys into both tables- so that the attributes themselves aren't held in the first table but are instead referred to. Apparently this is common in database normalization, although it is still insane because I know that, since the key is a string, it would take a maximum of 1 attribute per 30 first table room entries to yield a space benefit, let alone the time and complexity problems.
How can I write a LINQ to SQL query to only return values from the first table, such that they hold only specific attributes, as defined in the list in the second table? I attempted to use a Join or GroupJoin, but apparently SQL Server 2008 cannot use a Tuple as the return value.
"I attempted to use a Join or
GroupJoin, but apparently SQL Server
2008 cannot use a Tuple as the return
value".
You can use anonymous types instead of Tuples which are supported by Linq2SQL.
IE:
from x in source group x by new {x.Field1, x.Field2}
I'm not quite clear what you're asking for. Some code might help. Are you looking for something like this?
var q = from i in ctx.Items
select new
{
i.ItemId,
i.ItemTitle,
Attributes = from map in i.AttributeMaps
select map.Attribute
};
I use this page all the time for figuring out complex linq queries when I know the sql approach I want to use.
VB http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vbasic/bb688085
C# http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vcsharp/aa336746.aspx
If you know how to write the sql query to get the data you want then this will show you how to get the same result translating it into linq syntax.

Case-insensitive sort ordering in NHibernate

Consider the following criteria query:
var x = SomeCriteria.AddOrder(new Order("Name", true)).List();
This will order the result set by the Name property, but case sensitive:
"A1"
"B1"
"a2"
Any ideas how to add the order case insensitive so result "a2" will end up before "B1"?
You should be able to accomplish this by ordering on a projection that normalizes the case for you. For example, Oracle has a "lower" function that will lower case string data types like varchar2 and nvarchar2; so I will use this sql function to form a projection that will order appropriately.
var projection = Projections.SqlFunction("lower",
NHibernateUtil.String,
Projections.Property("Name"));
var x = SomeCriteria.AddOrder(Orders.Asc(projection)).List()
If you're using SQL Server, I'd recommend using the "upper" function instead of "lower" for efficiency. Microsoft has optimized its native code for performing uppercase comparisons, where the rest of the world seems to have optimized on lowercase.
Hibernate (Java) has an "ignoreCase()" method on the "Order" class, but it looks like NHibernate does not have this method on its "Order."
This is how I was thinking you could do it:
var x = SomeCriteria.AddOrder(new Order("Name", true).IgnoreCase()).List();
But unfortunately, there is no IgnoreCase().
As a workaround, you could use an HQL or SQL query - either of those should allow you to order case-insensitive.
This probably depends on a case-sensitivity setting on your database server. I suspect that NHibernate just issues an "ORDER BY" clause; at least, I can't imagine what else it would do. For SQL Server, the default sort order (collation) is dictionary order, case insensitive.
This article gives some techniques for performing case sensitive searches in SQL Server. However, my advice is to sort the list that is returned by the query in code. That solution preserves the database independence of NHibernate and let's you customize the sort order per your needs.
As I know the responses to my query are always fairly small, I ended up querying the data as normal and sorting them afterwards using Linq. It works, so why bother tweaking NHibernate ;) (Using SQLite, btw)

Categories