I'm using Mapster to map Dto instances to Model objects.
The Dtos are sent by a Javascript client, sending only the properties updated.
I would like to ignore null values, and have Mapster leave the model instance unchanged for this properties.
A simplified example to better explain the scenario:
// My .Net Dto class, used for client/server communication.
public class PersonDto
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Family { get; set; }
}
// My Model class. Let's assume is the same data as per the Dto.
public class Person
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Family { get; set; }
}
public void Update()
{
var existingPerson = new Person
{
Id = "A",
Name = "Ned",
Family = "Stark"
};
var patchDataSentFromClient = new PersonDto
{
Id = "A",
Name = "Rob"
};
patchDataSentFromClient.Adapt(existingPerson);
// Here existingPerson.Family should be "Stark", but it gets emptied out.
// the mapping should be equivalent to:
// if (patchDataSentFromClient.Family != null) existingPerson.Family = patchDataSentFromClient.Family;
}
Edit: the point is I don't want to write down the mapping condition for each of the thousands of properties in my Dtos. I want Mapster to Automap all string properties by name, but keep the "patch-like" logic of ignoring null values.
You can use IgnoreNullValues.
Related
We are using AutoMapper (9.0.0) in .net core for mapping values between source and destination. Till time this is working fine. However, we need to keep some of the values in destination as it is after mapping.
We have tried to used UseDestinationValue() and Ignore() methods on member, but it is not preserving the existing values. Below is the code for the same.
RequestModel
public class RequestModel
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int SubmittedById { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public string Location { get; set; }
}
RequestDto
public class RequestDto
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int SubmittedById { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public string Location { get; set; }
public string SubmittedByName { get; set; }
}
We are accepting Dto in API as request parameter
API
[HttpPost]
public IActionResult Save([FromBody] RequestDto requestDto)
{
// Some logic to save records
}
So, before saving the records we are mapping RequestDto to RequestModel and passing that model to DAL layer to save the records like this
var requestModel = MapperManager.Mapper.Map<RequestDto, RequestModel>(RequestDto);
And call to data layer
var requestModel = DAL.Save(RequestModel)
So, after receiving the updated request model we are again mapping it to requestDto, in this case we are loosing the value for SubmittedByName property.
return MapperManager.Mapper.Map<RequestModel, RequestDto>(requestModel);
Mapper Class
public class RequestProfile: Profile
{
public RequestProfile()
{
CreateMap<RequestModel, RequestDto>()
CreateMap<RequestDto, RequestModel>()
}
}
This SubmittedByName column is not present in the Request table, but we want to utilize its value after saving the records.
So, how can we preserve the destination value after mapping.
Any help on this appreciated !
I think you have to use the Map overload that accepts destination.
This works for me, using same model / dto you posted, in a console application:
var config = new MapperConfiguration(cfg => cfg.CreateMap<RequestModel, RequestDto>().ReverseMap());
var mapper = config.CreateMapper();
var source = new RequestDto
{
Id = 1,
SubmittedById = 100,
SubmittedByName = "User 100",
Description = "Item 1",
Location = "Location 1"
};
Console.WriteLine($"Name (original): {source.SubmittedByName}");
var destination = mapper.Map<RequestDto, RequestModel>(source);
Console.WriteLine($"Name (intermediate): {source.SubmittedByName}");
source = mapper.Map<RequestModel, RequestDto>(destination, source);
Console.WriteLine($"Name (final): {source.SubmittedByName}");
The standard Map method creates a new object but the overloaded method uses existing object as destination.
We have tried to used UseDestinationValue() and Ignore() methods on member, but it is not preserving the existing values. Below is the code for the same.
since that didn't work for you
I would suggest creating a generic class like this (assuming you have multiple classes of RequestDto)
class RequesterInfo<T>
{
public string RequesterName { get; set; } // props you want to preserve
public T RequestDto { get; set; } // props to be mapped
}
by keeping the mapping as it is,
and modifying your code to something like this:
var requestModel = MapperManager.Mapper.Map<RequestDto, RequestModel>(RequesterInfo.RequestDto);
so what happens is that you modify the T RequestDto part of the object without modifying other properties.
I have an application that has two similar but different objects and I want to store those objects in the same collection. What is the best way to do this? And how can I query this collection?
Today my collections is represented by:
public IMongoCollection<Post> Posts
{
get
{
return _database.GetCollection<Post>("posts");
}
}
And I have this class:
public class Post
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public string Message { get; set; }
}
public class NewTypePost
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public string Image { get; set; }
}
So, today I just can save and query using Post class. Now I want to store and retrive the both classes, Post and NewTypePost.
I tried to change the class type from Post to dynamic. But when I did this, I could not query the collections.
MongoDB .NET driver offers few possibilites in such cases:
Polymorphism
You can build a hierarchy of classes and MongoDB driver will be able to determine a type of an object it gets retrieved from the database:
[BsonKnownTypes(typeof(Post), typeof(NewTypePost))]
public abstract class PostBase
{
[BsonId]
public string Id { get; set; }
}
public class Post: PostBase
{
public string Message { get; set; }
}
public class NewTypePost: PostBase
{
public string Image { get; set; }
}
MongoDB driver will create additional field _t in every document which will represent corresponding class.
Single Class
You can still have Post class and use BsonIgnoreIfNull attribute to avoid serialization exception. MongoDB .NET driver will set those properties to null if they don't exist in your database.
public class Post
{
[BsonId]
public string Id { get; set; }
[BsonIgnoreIfNull]
public string Message { get; set; }
[BsonIgnoreIfNull]
public string Image { get; set; }
}
BsonDocument
You can also drop strongly-typed approach and use BsonDocument class which is dynamic dictionary-like structure that represents your Mongo documents
var collection = db.GetCollection<BsonDocument>("posts");
More details here
dynamic
Specifying dynamic as generic parameter of ICollection you should get a list of ExpandoObject that will hold all the values you have in your database.
var collection = db.GetCollection<dynamic>("posts");
var data = collection.Find(Builders<dynamic>.Filter.Empty).ToList();
var firstMessage = data[0].Message; // dynamically typed code
Suppose I have the next conn to a test database:
var mongoClient = new MongoClient(new MongoClientSettings
{
Server = new MongoServerAddress("localhost"),
});
var database = mongoClient.GetDatabase("TestDb");
Then I can do something like:
var col = database.GetCollection<Post>("posts");
var col2 = database.GetCollection<NewTypePost>("posts");
To get two different instances of IMongoCollection but pointing to the same collection in the database. Further I am able to save to each collection in the usual way:
col.InsertOne(new Post { Message = "m1" });
col2.InsertOne(new NewTypePost { Image = "im1" });
Then, I'm also able to query from those collection base on the specific fields:
var p1= col.Find(Builders<Post>.Filter.Eq(x=>x.Message, "m1")).FirstOrDefault();
var p2 =col2.Find(Builders<NewTypePost>.Filter.Eq(x=>x.Image, "im1")).FirstOrDefault();
Console.WriteLine(p1?.Message); // m1
Console.WriteLine(p2?.Image); // im1
I don't know if that's what you want but it uses the same collection. BTW, change the Id properties to be decorated with [BsonId, BsonRepresentation(BsonType.ObjectId)]. Hope it helps.
Use the BsonDocument data type. It can do all of that. BsonDocument and dynamic back and forth is very convenient.
public class CustomObject{
public long Id{get;set;}
public string Name{get;set;}
public List<(string,object)> CollectionDynamic{get;set;}
}
// inserted in mongo
//public class CustomObject_in_Db{
// public long Id {get;set;}
// public string Name {get;set;}
// public string field2 {get;set;}
// public string field3 {get;set;}
// public string field4 {get;set;}
// public string field5 {get;set;}
// }
// something code... mapper(config)
Automapper.Mapper.CreateMap<BsonDocument,CustomObject>()
.ForMember(dest=>dest.Id, a=>a.MapFrom(s=>s.Id.GetValue(nameof(CustomObject.Id)).AsInt64)
.ForMember(dest=>dest.Name, a=>a.MapFrom(s=>s.Id.GetValue(nameof(CustomObject.Name)).AsString)
.ForMember(dest=>dest.CollectionDynamic, a=>a.MapFrom(s=>_getList(s));
// .......
private List<(string, object)> _getList(BsonDocument source){
return source.Elements.Where(e=>!typeof(CustomObject).GetProperties().Select(s=>s.Name).Any(a=>a ==e.Name)).Select(e=>e.Name, BsonTryMapper.MapToDotNetValue(e.Value)));
}
I have four classes :
public class Customer
{
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
public List<Product> Product { get; set; }
}
public class Product
{
public int ProductNumber { get; set; }
public string ProductColor { get; set; }
}
///////////////////////////////////////////////
public class Customer_
{
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
public List<Article> Article { get; set; }
}
public class Article
{
public int ArticleNumber { get; set; }
public string ArticleColor { get; set; }
}
And one instance :
var Cus = new List<Customer>
{
new Customer()
{
FirstName = "FirstName1",
LastName = "LastName1",
Product = new List<Product>
{
new Product()
{
ProductColor = "ProductColor1",
ProductNumber = 11
}
}
},
new Customer()
{
FirstName = "FirstName2",
LastName = "LastName2",
Product = new List<Product>
{
new Product()
{
ProductColor = "ProductColor2",
ProductNumber = 12
}
}
}
};
I want to create a new object List<Customer_> with the value of my instance Cus. For example Customer.FirstName = Customer_.FirstName, Customer.Product.ProductColor = Customer_.Article.ArticleColor etc
What is the best way to do this easily, could one use a Dictionary?
Mapping can be accomplished through the use of an Interface.
Define an interface(s) which provide a mapping of logically named properties such as the common color properties you mention:
// Some entities have different named properties but can be joined
// using those properties. This interface shows a common color which
// when implemented will route the processing to a common shared property
// which reports and sets the associated color.
public interface IDefinedColor
{
string Color { get; set; }
}
If you have to create partial classes for Product and Article and have them adhere to said interfaces. Hint if using an entity mapper such as EF this is a great way to do such maping using partials. Implement implement the interface and hook up the commonality:
// Holds the common properties for future processing.
public partial class Product : IDefinedColor
{
public string Color
{
get { return ProductColor; }
set { ProductColor = value; }
}
}
Then work off of the IDefinedColor mapped implementations as needed.
By using interfaces one is letting all future developers know of the contract which specifies a business logic equality in the properties and it is not hidden in other joining classes.
You could create a mapper extension class
public static class MapperExtension
{
public Customer_ Convert(this Customer customer)
{
return new Customer_()
{
FirstName = customer.FirstName,
LastName = customer.LastName,
Article = customer.Product.Convert()
};
}
public static List<Article> Convert(this List<Product> products)
{
return products.Select(x=> new Article(){
ArticleNumber = x.ProductNumber,
ArticleColor = x.ProductColor
};
}
}
make sure you reference the proper namespace where you place the extension class.
Call the code like this
Where customers is a List filled from your code
List<Customer_> convertedCustomers_ = customers.Select(x=> x.Convert()).ToList();
It depends on the relationhip between those components but I would simply add constructor to Customer_ that accepts a Customer object. And then you invoke that do perform the conversion. e.g.
public class Article
{
public Article(Product source)
{
this.ArticleNumber = source.ProductNumber;
this.ArticleColor = source.ProductColor;
}
}
public class Customer_
{
public Customer_(Customer source)
{
this.FirstName = source.FirstName;
this.LastName = source.LastName;
this.Article = source.Product.Select(o => new Article(o)).ToList()
}
...
}
//and finally to convert the list you can do something like
//initial list
var Cus = new List<Customer>() { ... etc. }
/converted list
var Cus_ = Cus.Select(o => new Cusomter_(o)).ToList();
Edit: I see from your comment above that you actually have 100 properties to map. I can see this is a pain. But if you have complex transformations like Product to Article then I would still go the manual route as above so you can be completely clear about what is going on. Alternatively you could look to use inheritance to redesign your objects with common base classes or interfaces, that would probably make mapping easier.
Goal: to save ViewModel object by Entity Framework. I have UserViewModel object which has list of UnitViewModel. Then, I have a UserAdapter class which converts UserViewModel into Entity Framework User object (see Convert()below how).
Now, my question is how do I convert this list of UnitViewModel to its corresponding Entity Framework Unit list? - Do I have to get each object from DB Context by calling something like context.Units.Where(u=>myListofUnitIDs.Contains(u.UnitID))?
public class UserViewModel
{
public Guid? UserID { get; set; }
public string UserName { get; set; }
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
public string Password { get; set; }
public DateTime? CreateTime { get; set; }
public List<UnitViewModel> UserUnits { get; set; }
}
public class UnitViewModel
{
public Guid UnitID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public int? SortIndex { get; set; }
public DateTime CreateTime { get; set; }
public bool Assigned { get; set; }
}
public class UserAdapter
{
public static User Convert(UserViewModel userView)
{
User user;
if (userView.UserID.HasValue)
{
using (var provider = new CoinsDB.UsersProvider())
{
user = provider.GetUser(userView.UserID.Value);
}
}
else
{
user = new User();
}
user.FirstName = userView.FirstName;
user.LastName = user.LastName;
user.Password = StringHelper.GetSHA1(userView.Password);
user.UserName = user.UserName;
user.CreateTime = DateTime.Now;
// Problem here :)
// user.Units = userView.UserUnits;
return user;
}
}
UPDATE: The main concern here is that I have to retrieve each Unit from database to match (or map) it with ViewModel.Unit objects, right? Can I avoid it?
For your information, this operation is called as Mapping mainly. So, you want to map your view model object to the entity object.
For this, you can either use already existed 3rd party library as AutoMapper. It will map properties by reflection which have same name. Also you can add your custom logic with After method. But, this approach has some advantages and disadvantages. Being aware of these disadvantages could help you to decide whether you must use this API or not. So, I suggest you to read some articles about advantages and disadvantages of AutoMapper especially for converting entities to other models. One of such disadvantages is that it can be problem to change the name of one property in the view model in the future, and AutoMapper will not handle this anymore and you won't get any warning about this.
foreach(var item in userView.UserUnits)
{
// get the mapped instance of UnitViewModel as Unit
var userUnit = Mapper.Map<UnitViewModel, UserUnit>(item);
user.Units.Add(userUnit);
}
So, I recommend to write your custom mappers.
For example, I have created a custom library for this and it maps objects lik this:
user.Units = userView.UserUnits
.Select(userUnitViewModel => userUnitViewModel.MapTo<UserUnit>())
.ToList();
And I am implementing these mapping functions as:
public class UserUnitMapper:
IMapToNew<UnitViewModel, UserUnit>
{
public UnitViewModel Map(UserUnit source)
{
return new UnitViewModel
{
Name = source.Name,
...
};
}
}
And then in runtime, I am detecting the types of the objects which will be used during mapping, and then call the Map method. In this way, your mappers will be seperated from your action methods. But, if you want it urgently, of course you can use this:
foreach(var item in userView.UserUnits)
{
// get the mapped instance of UnitViewModel as Unit
var userUnit= new UserUnit()
{
Name = item.Name,
...
};
user.Units.Add(userUnit);
}
Can the Entity Framework method DbPropertyValues.SetValues be used in reverse to set the values of an object, namely a view model or Data Transfer Object, based on the current values of properties within an entity?
This is one example of how I am using SetValues together with DTOs to update only the properties that I specify in the class definition for the DTO.
public Address UpdateAddress(Address address)
{
using (var context = new OrdersContext())
{
var targetAddress = context.Addresses.FirstOrDefault(a => a.AddressID == address.AddressID && a.User.UserName.ToLower() == HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name.ToLower());
if (targetAddress == null) return null; // Address not found or user doesn't own this address.
context.Entry(targetAddress).CurrentValues.SetValues(address);
context.SaveChanges();
return new Address
{
AddressID = targetAddress.AddressID,
AddressLine1 = targetAddress.AddressLine1,
AddressLine2 = targetAddress.AddressLine2,
City = targetAddress.City,
State = targetAddress.State,
ZipCode = targetAddress.ZipCode
};
}
}
public class Address
{
public int AddressID { get; set; }
public string AddressLine1 { get; set; }
public string AddressLine2 { get; set; }
public string City { get; set; }
public string State { get; set; }
public string ZipCode { get; set; }
// public string UserID { get; set; } // UserID is excluded from the view model so that it cannot be updated.
}
As the documention on SetValues indicates
The given object can be of any type. Any property on the object with a
name that matches a property name in the dictionary and can be read,
will be read. Other properties will be ignored. This allows, copying
of properties from simple Data Transfer Objects (DTOs).
Can SetValues be used in reverse to set the values of the DTO from the entity, so that the values don't have to be set manually one by one? Or is there another method that works like SetValues but in reverse?
There's another DbPropertyValues method called ToObject, but it doesn't work with DTOs.
I'd like to do something like this:
public Address UpdateAddress(Address address)
{
using (var context = new OrdersContext())
{
var targetAddress = context.Addresses.FirstOrDefault(a => a.AddressID == address.AddressID && a.User.UserName.ToLower() == HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name.ToLower());
if (targetAddress == null) return null; // Address not found or user doesn't own this address.
context.Entry(targetAddress).CurrentValues.SetValues(address);
context.SaveChanges();
return context.Entry(targetAddress).ToObject(new Address());
}
}
Thanks!