Santax for Joins using Linq/lambda & Nhibernate - c#

Originally I had this linq statement:
refusedZones = session.Query<ZoneBO>().Where(x => x.StateId == _config.RefusedStateId).ToList();
Works fine and I get my list with business objects. I now need to change this query, I still want my list of strongly typed business objects back, but I have to do a join with another table.
I have tested this SQL query and it works the way I want it to:
select z.ZoneName, z.ZoneSerial from zone z join transactionzone tz on z.ZoneId = tz.ZoneId where z.StateId = 3 and tz.StateId = 16
My question is how do I do this in linq with a Lambda expression? I assume it will start like this...
var refusedZones = session.Query<ZoneBO>().Join(.......expression here....).ToList();
Can anyone help me with the santax please, very new to linq, finding it confusing.

You will need to add a reference from Zone to TransactionZone. How have you setup your mappings?
Once you have a reference setup it is unnecessary to explicitly write the joins in LINQ.
You can do this:
session.Query<ZoneBO>()
.Where(x => x.State.Id == 3 && x.TransactionZone.State.Id == 16)
.ToList()

Related

How can i access an object in a list in c# query with ef?

So I´m having a problem with a query im trying to do. I´m trying to get the last element of a list in a linq query in c# using ef.
Here is the code im trying to execute:
public List<Viagem> getViagensToBeCompletedInBlocoTrabalho()
{
return this.context.Viagens
.Where(v => v.blocosTrabalho.Count() == 0
|| !v.blocosTrabalho.LastOrDefault().noFim.Equals(v.horasPassagem.LastOrDefault().codigoNo)
)
.ToList();
}
But i get this error: Queries performing 'LastOrDefault' operation must have a deterministic sort order. Rewrite the query to apply an 'OrderBy' clause on the sequence before calling 'LastOrDefault'.
What am i doing wrong here?
By the way the sorting that i want is the order of entries in the table so i don´t really want to sort anything. Although i have also tested sorting and it doesn´t work.
Thanks for the help in advance :-)
Actually SQL standard do not support retrieving records from the end and even do not guarantee records in concrete order. EF is trying to simulate that by correcting OrderBy operator and if you do not specify that - it will fail.
Consider to rewrite your query and make it performant:
public List<Viagem> getViagensToBeCompletedInBlocoTrabalho()
{
var query =
from v in this.context.Viagens
from b in v.blocosTrabalho.OrderByDescending(x => x.Id)
.Take(1).DefaultIfEmpty()
from h in v.horasPassagem.OrderByDescending(x => x.Id)
.Take(1).DefaultIfEmpty()
where
b == null || b != null && b.noFim == h.codigoNo
select v;
return query.ToList();
}

Entity Framework (using In and Select Distinct)

I am relatively new to Entity Framework 6.0 and I have come across a situation where I want to execute a query in my C# app that would be similar to this SQL Query:
select * from periods where id in (select distinct periodid from ratedetails where rateid = 3)
Is it actually possible to execute a query like this in EF or would I need to break it into smaller steps?
Assuming that you have in your Context class:
DbSet<Period> Periods...
DbSet<RateDetail> RateDetails...
You could use some Linq like this:
var distincts = dbContext.RateDetails
.Where(i => i.rateId == 3)
.Select(i => i.PeriodId)
.Distinct();
var result = dbContext.Periods
.Where(i => i.Id)
.Any(j => distincts.Contains(j.Id));
Edit: Depending on your entities, you will probably need a custom Comparer for Distinct(). You can find a tutorial here, and also here
or use some more Linq magic to split the results.
Yes, this can be done but you should really provide a better example for your query. You are already providing a bad starting point there. Lets use this one:
SELECT value1, value2, commonValue
FROM table1
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM table2
WHERE table1.commonValue = table2.commonValue
// include some more filters here on table2
)
First, its almost always better to use EXISTS instead of IN.
Now to turn this into a Lambda would be something like this, again you provided no objects or object graph so I will just make something up.
DbContext myContext = this.getContext();
var myResults = myContext.DbSet<Type1>().Where(x => myContext.DbSet<Type2>().Any(y => y.commonValue == x.commonValue)).Select(x => x);
EDIT - updated after you provided the new sql statement
Using your example objects this would produce the best result. Again, this is more efficient than a Contains which translates to an IN clause.
Sql you really want:
SELECT *
FROM periods
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM ratedetails WHERE rateid = 3 AND periods.id = ratedetails.periodid)
The Lamda statement you are after
DbContext myContext = this.getContext();
var myResults = myContext.DbSet<Periods>()
.Where(x => myContext.DbSet<RateDetails>().Any(y => y.periodid == x.id && y.rateid == 3))
.Select(x => x);
Here is a good starting point for learning about lamda's and how to use them.
Lambda Expressions (C# Programming Guide).
this is your second where clause in your query
var priodidList=ratedetails.where(x=>x.rateid ==3).DistinctBy(x=>x.rateid);
now for first part of query
var selected = periods.Where(p => p.id
.Any(a => priodidList.Contains(a.periodid ))
.ToList();

LINQ to EF returning all fields not just those in Select()

This is the gist of my query which I'm testing in LinqPad using Linq to Entity Framework.
In my mind the resultant SQL should begin with something like SELECT TableA.ID AS myID. Instead, the SELECT includes all fields from all of the tables. Needless to say this incurs a massive performance hit among other problems. How can I prevent this?
var AnswerList = this.Answers
.Where(x=>
..... various conditions on x and related entities...
)
.GroupBy(x => new {x.TableA,x.TableB,x.TableC})
.Select(g=>new {
myID = g.Key.TableA.ID,
})
AnswerList.Dump();
In practice I'm using a new type instead of an anonymous one but the results are the same either way.
Let me know if you need me to fill in more of the ...'s.
UPDATE
I've noticed I can prevent this problem by explicitly specifying the fields I want returned in the GroupBy method, e.g. new {x.TableA.ID ... }
But I still don't understand why it doesn't work just using the Select method (which DOES work when doing the equivalent in Linq to SQL).
Hi,
Could you please try below....?
var query = from SubCat in mySubCategory
where SubCat.CategoryID == 1
group 1 by SubCat.CategoryID into grouped
select new { Catg = grouped.Key,
Count = grouped.Count() };
Thank you,
Vishal Patel

Identify items in one list not in another of a different type

I need to identify items from one list that are not present in another list. The two lists are of different entities (ToDo and WorkshopItem). I consider a workshop item to be in the todo list if the Name is matched in any of the todo list items.
The following does what I'm after but find it awkward and hard to understand each time I revisit it. I use NHibernate QueryOver syntax to get the two lists and then a LINQ statement to filter down to just the Workshop items that meet the requirement (DateDue is in the next two weeks and the Name is not present in the list of ToDo items.
var allTodos = Session.QueryOver<ToDo>().List();
var twoWeeksTime = DateTime.Now.AddDays(14);
var workshopItemsDueSoon = Session.QueryOver<WorkshopItem>()
.Where(w => w.DateDue <= twoWeeksTime).List();
var matches = from wsi in workshopItemsDueSoon
where !(from todo in allTodos
select todo.TaskName)
.Contains(wsi.Name)
select wsi;
Ideally I'd like to have just one NHibernate query that returns a list of WorkshopItems that match my requirement.
I think I've managed to put together a Linq version of the answer put forward by #CSL and will mark that as the accepted answer as it put me in the direction of the following.
var twoWeeksTime = DateTime.Now.AddDays(14);
var subquery = NHibernate.Criterion.QueryOver.Of<ToDo>().Select(t => t.TaskName);
var matchingItems = Session.QueryOver<WorkshopItem>()
.Where(w => w.DateDue <= twoWeeksTime &&
w.IsWorkshopItemInProgress == true)
.WithSubquery.WhereProperty(x => x.Name).NotIn(subquery)
.Future<WorkshopItem>();
It returns the results I'm expecting and doesn't rely on magic strings. I'm hesitant because I don't fully understand the WithSubquery (and whether inlining it would be a good thing). It seems to equate to
WHERE WorkshopItem.Name IS NOT IN (subquery)
Also I don't understand the Future instead of List. If anyone would shed some light on those that would help.
I am not 100% sure how to achieve what you need using LINQ so to give you an option I am just putting up an alternative solution using nHibernate Criteria (this will execute in one database hit):
// Create a query
ICriteria query = Session.CreateCriteria<WorkShopItem>("wsi");
// Restrict to items due within the next 14 days
query.Add(Restrictions.Le("DateDue", DateTime.Now.AddDays(14));
// Return all TaskNames from Todo's
DetachedCriteria allTodos = DetachedCriteria.For(typeof(Todo)).SetProjection(Projections.Property("TaskName"));
// Filter Work Shop Items for any that do not have a To-do item
query.Add(SubQueries.PropertyNotIn("Name", allTodos);
// Return results
var matchingItems = query.Future<WorkShopItem>().ToList()
I'd recommend
var workshopItemsDueSoon = Session.QueryOver<WorkshopItem>()
.Where(w => w.DateDue <= twoWeeksTime)
var allTodos = Session.QueryOver<ToDo>();
Instead of
var allTodos = Session.QueryOver<ToDo>().List();
var workshopItemsDueSoon = Session.QueryOver<WorkshopItem>()
.Where(w => w.DateDue <= twoWeeksTime).List();
So that the collection isn't iterated until you need it to be.
I've found that it's helpfull to use linq extension methods to make subqueries more readable and less awkward.
For example:
var matches = from wsi in workshopItemsDueSoon
where !allTodos.Select(it=>it.TaskName).Contains(wsi.Name)
select wsi
Personally, since the query is fairly simple, I'd prefer to do it like so:
var matches = workshopItemsDueSoon.Where(wsi => !allTodos.Select(it => it.TaskName).Contains(wsi.Name))
The latter seems less verbose to me.

Linq to SQL - Query

I am trying to mimic below statement in Linq to SQL.
WHERE (rtrim(posid) like '%101' or rtrim(posid) like '%532')
I statement basically determine if posid ends with 101 or 532. In the above example I am only making 2 comparisons but their could be 1 to N comparisons all joined with OR. I store the comparison values (101,532,...) in a generic list that I send to my Linq to SQL method.
I have tried to mimic above SQL using a where clause unsuccessfully (example below):
var PosNum = new List<string>();
PosNum.Add("101");
PosNum.Add("532");
var q = (from a in context.tbl_sspos select a);
q = q.Where(p => PosNum.Contains(p.posid.Trim()));
The issue with the above where clause is that it tries to do an exact match rather I want an ends with comparison.
How would I mimic the SQL statement in Linq to SQL.
Thank You in advance for any help / advice you can provide.
I would use String.EndsWith();
This will check the end of the string rather than entire contents of it.
var q = (from a in context.tbl_sspos select a);
q = q.Where(p => p.posid.EndsWith("102") || p.posid.EndsWith("532"));
In EF 4 you can use the StartsWith / EndsWith methods by now. Might also work in LINQ to SQL.
UPDATE
Just realized that you are trying todo this against multiple values (PosNum), I don't think that this is directly supported currently. You can however concatenate multiple Where()clauses to get the result.
UPDATE 2
As AdamKing pointed out concatenating the where clauses was filtering against all PosNum values, here is the corrected version:
var baseQuery = (from a in context.tbl_sspos select a);
IEnumerable<YourType> q = null;
foreach(var pos in PosNum)
{
if(q == null)
q = baseQuery.Where(a => a.posid.EndsWith(pos));
else
q = q.Union(baseQuery.Where(a => a.posid.EndsWith(pos)));
}
This is not as pretty anymore, but works nonetheless.

Categories