Entity context lifetime with MySQL - c#

I am new to the Entity Framework 4. I've done a bit of playing around with SQL Server, and MySQL. I ran into a problem using MySQL in regards to lazy loading, and I believe is that the MySQL connector doesn't allow multiple queries on the same connection - it must be closed first.
I would like to run a query, store a reference to the results in a field of my class, and then later on, modify/save it or load related data. However, the context has gone out of scope and been disposed of.
class MyClass {
List<AThing> _stuff;
private void ReadStuff() {
using (var context = new MyEntities()) {
_stuff = context.TableOfStuff.ToList();
}
}
// Stuff is used by other methods, bound to controls, etc.
}
So, does Stuff exist without a context? From what I understand, the context is what does change tracking and the like... Once ToList() is called, my context is useless for another query.
Must I avoid this? Is there a better way of accomplishing this? Am I wrong above?

Your code is fine. When context goes out of scope the items in the list are no longer attached. If you change them you can Attach them to a new context. But there are other ways depening on what you want to do and how you want to do it.
Calling ToList materializes your query but won't leave an open DataReader. So you should be able to execute multiple queries.

Related

Determine if the context of an entity proxy has been disposed

In a EF 6 project, I am writing validation functions for entities. some are static while others are instance methods of the entities themselves.
Ignoring whether this is bad practice or not, I'd like to check whether the entities were created using a context and if so, whether they are still attached.
Please note that these functions do NOT have access to the context object, just the entity classes.
As an example, a method validates Department entity and cascades validation to all associated Department.Employee instances.
If the hierarchy was created manually, validation will succeed.
If the hierarchy was created using a context which is still alive, validation will succeed albeit slower.
If the hierarchy was created using a context which has been disposed, validation will fail with an ObjectDisposedException (provided proxy-creation was enabled and .Include(***) was not used).
So the question, is it possible to detect the above scenarios without access to a DbContext instance? If not, how can we best validate entire hierarchies irrespective of how they were created.
var result = true;
var departments = ???; // Constructed manually or through a DbContext instance.
foreach (var department in departments)
{
result &= department.Validate();
foreach (var employee in department.Employees)
{
result &= employee.Validate();
}
}
EDIT: Please note that this is for a desktop application that cannot have long-running DbContext instances. they are almost always disposed immediately after retrieving data. Re-querying the database does not seem a viable option for validation since it is triggered by trivial user input and would slow down the entire user experience.
From your question
Please note that these functions do NOT have access to the context object, just the entity classes.
two solutions come to mind, none really palatable:
Build your own tracker and make it available to these methods somehow.
Add something to your entities, for example a WasLoaded property that gets set when you query your context. That WasLoaded could be set by either
Writing an EF interceptor that sets it.
Adding an artificial bit column with all values set to 1. Then map that to the property; the property will be false if you constructed it outside of the context, true if loaded from the context.
The tracker seems to be the cleanest because it doesn't pollute your model. The interceptor is a decent alternative if you're not concerned about your model.
And while it doesn't answer your question directly, you could avoid the use of proxies, in which case your validation works the same way regardless because you have your model in memory. There's the usual trade-offs to consider though.
I'm not sure how you'd detect the last scenario. I suppose you could have your tracker track more than the entities... have it also track the context's state.

Can EF5 works fine in event based processing

I have this code for example for an event handler
public void ONDataArrived ( string data )
{
//do some processing and save it to DB using EF
ctx.Add ( x ) ;
ctx.SaveChanges () ;
}
Is there any chance that EF may error if this event fired a couple of times in the same time ?
thanks
The context objects from the Entity Framework are not threadsafe - thus it will break.
You will need to synchronize the Context in case events will be processed in parallel.
EF 5 can work in several different models, depending on how you want to use it. There are templates for using context-tracked entities, self-tracked entities, or POCOs. For your case, I would recommend not keeping your context object around. Self-tracking entities are probably what you're looking for - they store internally all of the information needed to update the database instead of relying on the context to track it.
If you go the self-tracked route, then your OnDataArrived method would just create a new context object and update the entity, which would also address the threading issue mentioned by weismat.

Can Entity Framework context be reused all the time in code?

In this question I was having problem with saving objects that had foreign keys because Objects were build from multiple Objects connected to each other thru foreign keys but they were loaded using different context each time. For example:
using (var context = new EntityBazaCRM(Settings.sqlDataConnectionDetailsCRM)) {
IQueryable<Konsultanci> listaKonsultantow = from k in context.Konsultancis
select k;
}
Then somewhere else in the code there would be more context used to get more object types like Persons, Training, you name it.
Then there would be code to save it (simplified):
using (var context = new EntityBazaCRM(Settings.sqlDataConnectionDetailsCRM)) {
if (context.Szkolenies.Any(t => t.SzkolenieID == currentSzkolenie.SzkolenieID)) {
context.Szkolenies.Attach(currentSzkolenie);
context.ObjectStateManager.ChangeObjectState(currentSzkolenie, EntityState.Modified);
} else {
context.Szkolenies.AddObject(currentSzkolenie);
}
context.SaveChanges();
}
Usually after trying to save it there would be multiple error messages
An object with the same key already exists in the ObjectStateManager. The ObjectStateManager cannot track multiple objects with the same key.
or
The relationship between the two objects cannot be defined because they are attached to different ObjectContext objects
and few others.
So to resolve it I have declared private EntityBazaCRM context = new EntityBazaCRM(Settings.sqlDataConnectionDetailsCRM); on top of my class and reused it all the time without putting it into using. Thanks to this action I didn't have to attach anything prior to saving or anything. I was just using same context and attached any foreign keys I wanted using currentUczestnik.Szkolenie = szkolenie; and currentUczestnik.Konsultanci = consultants;. It saved without problems.
To the question:
It works for a small GUI that I have now that isn't overcomplicated. But what if I introduce multithreading, try to get multiple values from all over the place for different objects (load object to GUI, to ListView etc) using the same Context? Won't it blow back on me hurting me severely ?
In my old code before I found out about Entity Framework I was using:
const string preparedCommand = #"SELECT ID FROM TABLE WHERE NAME = "TEST"";
using (SqlConnection varConnection = Locale.sqlConnectOneTime(Locale.sqlDataConnectionDetails))
using (var sqlQuery = new SqlCommand(preparedCommand, varConnection))
using (SqlDataReader sqlQueryResult = sqlQuery.ExecuteReader())
while (sqlQueryResult.Read()) {
string id= sqlQueryResult["id"].ToString();
}
}
which basically I was using for every single time I wanted to connect to SQL. If there was no connection, it would be established, if there was connection it would be reused and no problems with multithreading.
Can someone tell me what problems I can expect from doing it the way I found out to be working? Or maybe it's best way to do it?
But what if I introduce multithreading, try to get multiple values
from all over the place for different objects (load object to GUI, to
ListView etc) using the same Context? Won't it blow back on me hurting
me severely ?
Yes, yes it will. A context is basically a thin layer on top of a database connection - which is not thread safe, so you cannot reuse the same context across threads. What you are looking for is a unit of work within which you use the same context, but once that unit of work is completed you dispose the context. Since you use your own repository implementation you will have to build the unit of work on top of those repositories.

Entity Framework Multiple Object Contexts

This question has been asked 500 different times in 50 different ways...but here it is again, since I can't seem to find the answer I'm looking for:
I am using EF4 with POCO proxies.
A.
I have a graph of objects I fetched from one instance of an ObjectContext. That ObjectContext is disposed.
B.
I have an object I fetched from another instance of an ObjectContext. That ObjectContext has also been disposed.
I want to set a related property on a bunch of things from A using the entity in B....something like
foreach(var itemFromA in collectionFromA)
{
itemFromA.RelatedProperty = itemFromB;
}
When I do that, I get the exception:
System.InvalidOperationException occurred
Message=The relationship between the two objects cannot be defined because they are attached to different ObjectContext objects.
Source=System.Data.Entity
StackTrace:
at System.Data.Objects.DataClasses.RelatedEnd.Add(IEntityWrapper wrappedTarget, Boolean applyConstraints, Boolean addRelationshipAsUnchanged, Boolean relationshipAlreadyExists, Boolean allowModifyingOtherEndOfRelationship, Boolean forceForeignKeyChanges)
at System.Data.Objects.DataClasses.RelatedEnd.Add(IEntityWrapper wrappedEntity, Boolean applyConstraints)
at System.Data.Objects.DataClasses.EntityReference`1.set_ReferenceValue(IEntityWrapper value)
at System.Data.Objects.DataClasses.EntityReference`1.set_Value(TEntity value)
at
I guess I need to detach these entities from the ObjectContexts when they dispose in order for the above to work... The problem is, detaching all entities from my ObjectContext when it disposes seems to destroy the graph. If I do something like:
objectContext.ObjectStateManager.GetObjectStateEntries(EntityState.Added | EntityState.Deleted | EntityState.Modified | EntityState.Unchanged)
.Select(i => i.Entity).OfType<IEntityWithChangeTracker>().ToList()
.ForEach(i => objectContext.Detach(i));
All the relations in the graph seem to get unset.
How can I go about solving this problem?
#Danny Varod is right. You should use one ObjectContext for the whole workflow. Moreover because your workflow seems as one logical feature containing multiple windows it should probably also use single presenter. Then you would follow recommended approach: single context per presenter. You can call SaveChanges multiple times so it should not break your logic.
The source of this issue is well known problem with deficiency of dynamic proxies generated on top of POCO entities combined with Fixup methods generated by POCO T4 template. These proxies still hold reference to the context when you dispose it. Because of that they think that they are still attached to the context and they can't be attached to another context. The only way how to force them to release the reference to the context is manual detaching. In the same time once you detach an entity from the context it is removed from related attached entities because you can't have mix of attached and detached entities in the same graph.
The issue actually not occures in the code you call:
itemFromA.RelatedProperty = itemFromB;
but in the reverse operation triggered by Fixup method:
itemFromB.RelatedAs.Add(itemFromA);
I think the ways to solve this are:
Don't do this and use single context for whole unit of work - that is the supposed usage.
Remove reverse navigation property so that Fixup method doesn't trigger that code.
Don't use POCO T4 template with Fixup methods or modify T4 template to not generate them.
Turn off lazy loading and proxy creation for these operations. That will remove dynamic proxies from your POCOs and because of that they will be independent on the context.
To turn off proxy creation and lazy loading use:
var context = new MyContext();
context.ContextOptions.ProxyCreationEnabled = false;
You can actually try to write custom method to detach the whole object graph but as you said it was asked 500 times and I haven't seen working solution yet - except the serialization and deserialization to the new object graph.
I think you have a few different options here, 2 of them are:
Leave context alive until you are done with the process, use only 1 context, not 2.
a. Before disposing of context #1, creating a deep clone of graph, using BinaryStreamer or a tool such as ValueInjecter or AutoMapper.
b. Merge changes from context #2 into cloned graph.
c. Upon saving, merge changes from cloned graph into graph created by new ObjectContext.
For future reference, this MSDN blogs link can help decide you decide what to do when:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dsimmons/archive/2008/02/17/context-lifetimes-dispose-or-reuse.aspx
I don't think you need to detach to solve the problem.
We do something like this:
public IList<Contact> GetContacts()
{
using(myContext mc = new mc())
{
return mc.Contacts.Where(c => c.City = "New York").ToList();
}
}
public IList<Sale> GetSales()
{
using(myContext mc = new mc())
{
return mc.Sales.Where(c => c.City = "New York").ToList();
}
}
public void SaveContact(Contact contact)
{
using (myContext mc = new myContext())
{
mc.Attach(contact);
contact.State = EntityState.Modified;
mc.SaveChanges();
}
}
public void Link()
{
var contacts = GetContacts();
var sales = GetSales();
foreach(var c in contacts)
{
c.AddSales(sales.Where(s => s.Seller == c.Name));
SaveContact(c);
}
}
This allows us to pull the data, pass it to another layer, let them do whatever they need to do, and then pass it back and we update or delete it. We do all of this with a separate context (one per method) (one per request).
The important thing to remember is, if you're using IEnumerables, they are deferred execution. Meaning they don't actually pull the information until you do a count or iterate over them. So if you want to use it outside your context you have to do a ToList() so that it gets iterated over and a list is created. Then you can work with that list.
EDIT Updated to be more clear, thanks to #Nick's input.
Ok I get it that your object context has long gone.
But let's look at it this way, Entity Framework implements unit of work concept, in which it tracks the changes you are making in your object graph so it can generate the SQL corresponding to the changes you have made. Without attached to context, there is no way it can tack changes.
If you have no control over context then I don't think there is anything you can do.
Otherwise there are two options,
Keep your object context alive for longer lifespan like session of user logged in etc.
Try to regenerate your proxy classes using self tracking text template that will enable change tracking in disconnected state.
But even in case of self tracking, you might still get little issues.

EF4 update a value for all rows in a table without doing a select

I need to reset a boolean field in a specific table before I run an update.
The table could have 1 million or so records and I'd prefer not to have to have to do a select before update as its taking too much time.
Basically what I need in code is to produce the following in TSQL
update tablename
set flag = false
where flag = true
I have some thing close to what I need here http://www.aneyfamily.com/terryandann/post/2008/04/Batch-Updates-and-Deletes-with-LINQ-to-SQL.aspx
but have yet to implement it but was wondering if there is a more standard way.
To keep within the restrictions we have for this project, we cant use SPROCs or directly write TSQL in an ExecuteStoreCommand parameter on the context which I believe you can do.
I'm aware that what I need to do may not be directly supported in EF4 and we may need to look at a SPROC for the job [in the total absence of any other way] but I just need to explore fully all possibilities first.
In an EF ideal world the call above to update the flag would be possible or alternatively it would be possible to get the entity with the id and the boolean flag only minus the associated entities and loop through the entity and set the flag and do a single SaveChanges call, but that may not be the way it works.
Any ideas,
Thanks in advance.
Liam
I would go to stakeholder who introduced restirctions about not using SQL or SProc directly and present him these facts:
Updates in ORM (like entity framework) work this way: you load object you perform modification you save object. That is the only valid way.
Obviously in you case it would mean load 1M entities and execute 1M updates separately (EF has no command batching - each command runs in its own roundtrip to DB) - usually absolutely useless solution.
The example you provided looks very interesting but it is for Linq-To-Sql. Not for Entity framework. Unless you implement it you can't be sure that it will work for EF, because infrastructure in EF is much more complex. So you can spent several man days by doing this without any result - this should be approved by stakeholder.
Solution with SProc or direct SQL will take you few minutes and it will simply work.
In both solution you will have to deal with another problem. If you already have materialized entities and you will run such command (via mentioned extension or via SQL) these changes will not be mirrored in already loaded entities - you will have to iterate them and set the flag.
Both scenarios break unit of work because some data changes are executed before unit of work is completed.
It is all about using the right tool for the right requirement.
Btw. loading of realted tables can be avoided. It is just about the query you run. Do not use Include and do not access navigation properties (in case of lazy loading) and you will not load relation.
It is possible to select only Id (via projection), create dummy entity (set only id and and flag to true) and execute only updates of flag but it will still execute up to 1M updates.
using(var myContext = new MyContext(connectionString))
{
var query = from o in myContext.MyEntities
where o.Flag == false
select o.Id;
foreach (var id in query)
{
var entity = new MyEntity
{
Id = id,
Flag = true
};
myContext.Attach(entity);
myContext.ObjectStateManager.GetObjectStateEntry(entity).SetModifiedProperty("Flag");
}
myContext.SaveChanges();
}
Moreover it will only work in empty object context (or at least no entity from updated table can be attached to context). So in some scenarios running this before other updates will require two ObjectContext instances = manually sharing DbConnection or two database connections and in case of transactions = distributed transaction and another performance hit.
Make a new EF model, and only add the one Table you need to make the update on. This way, all of the joins don't occur. This will greatly speed up your processing.
ObjectContext.ExecuteStoreCommand ( _
commandText As String, _
ParamArray parameters As Object() _
) As Integer
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.data.objects.objectcontext.executestorecommand.aspx
Edit
Sorry, did not read the post all the way.

Categories