We Keep Coding

How to solve the "Connection Was Not Closed, The connections current state is open" in c#?

So I'm trying to practice c# and stumbled with the connection error, I already stated that my connection will be closed but it tells me that my connection is still open. I really have no idea what's wrong with this.
public void getdept()
{
con.Open();
string query = "SELECT * FROM positions where PositionName=" + cbxposname.SelectedValue.ToString() + "";
SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand(query, con);
DataTable dt = new DataTable();
SqlDataAdapter sda = new SqlDataAdapter(query, con);
sda.Fill(dt);
foreach (DataRow dr in dt.Rows)
{
txtdeptname.Text = dr["Department"].ToString();
}
con.Close();
}
Any tips is welcomed!

You appear to be using a common connection object. Don't. Create your connection object where you use. Do so with a using statement and then the connection will be closed and destroyed at the end of the block. Store your connection string in a common location and then use that each time to create a new connection, e.g.
var table = new DataTable();
using (var connection = new SqlConnection(connectionString)
using (var adapter = new SqlDataAdapter("SQL query here", connection)
{
adapter.Fill(table);
}
// use table here.
There are a number of things to note from this code, other than the using block.
Firstly, it doesn't explicitly open the connection because there's no point. The Fill and Update methods of a data adapter will implicitly open the connection if it's currently closed and it will implicitly close the connection if it opened it. When using a data adapter, the only reason to open the connection explicitly is if you're calling multiple Fill and/or Update methods, so the connection is closed and reopened in between. Even if you do open the connection though, there's still no need to close it explicitly because that happens implicitly at the end of the using block.
Secondly, this code doesn't create a command object because there's no point. In your original code, you create a command object and then you don't use it. If you already have a command object then you can pass that to the data adapter constructor but you don't do that. You pass the SQL query and the connection, so the data adapter will create its own SelectCommand.
In actual fact, there's no point even creating a connection object here. The data adapter has a constructor that accepts a SQL query and a connection string, so you can just create the data adapter and let it do the rest internally:
var table = new DataTable();
using (var adapter = new SqlDataAdapter("SQL query here", connectionString)
{
adapter.Fill(table);
}
// use table here.

You are unnecessary opening and closing connections in your case. It's not needed here.
Your code should look like this.
using (SqlConnection con = new SqlConnection(connetionString))
{
using (DataTable dt = new DataTable())
{
using (SqlDataAdapter sda = new SqlDataAdapter(sql, con))
{
sda.Fill(dt);
foreach (DataRow dr in dt.Rows)
{
txtdeptname.Text = dr["Department"].ToString();
}
}
}
}
A few suggestions also, Please don't use * in the query, instead, use column names, Please use NOLOCK in the Query if it's required in your case and use the parameterized query.

How to load the datagridview using OOP C#

I am a beginner at C# and .NET oop concepts. I want to load the datagridview. I don't know how to pass the data. What I tried so far I attached below.
I created a class std
public void get()
{
SqlConnection con = new SqlConnection("server =.; initial catalog=testdb; User ID=sa; Password=123");
string sql = "select * from std";
con.Open();
SqlCommand cm = new SqlCommand(sql, con);
SqlDataReader dr = cm.ExecuteReader();
while ( dr.Read())
{
string stname = dr["st_name"].ToString();
string nicnum = dr["nic"].ToString();
}
con.Close();
}
Form: I am getting data like this way
std ss = new std();
ss.get();
dataGridView1.Rows.Clear();
If I wrote like this way how to pass data into the datagridview columns? I am stuck in this area

It's easier like this:
public void FillGrid()
{
var dt = new DataTable();
var da = new SqlDataAdapter("select * from std", "server =.; initial catalog=testdb; User ID=sa; Password=123");
da.Fill(dt);
dataGridView1.DataSource = dt;
}
but if you're going to use such a low level method of database access you should consider adding a DataSet type of file to your project; visual studio will write all this code and more for you with a few mouse clicks, and it makes a good job of creating tables and adapters that are a lot easier to work with

you have made multiple mistakes. First you read data wirh dataraeader and in every iteration define two stname and nimnum variables like. So when loop ends variables are destroyed. You have to define data table and read data by dataraeader and and add them to it row by row. Or read by sqldataadapter and read it immediately and pass to datatable object.Finnaly you pass datatable as return object of function. Use this vala as datasource of datagridview property if I'm not wrong.

Database method to work with any type of provider

So far my program only dealt with Sql Server for any type of data work. I would like my program to work with MySql as well. And now that I making this change, I would like to avoid code repetition as much as I can. So I started thinking about having a Factory Pattern with two concrete factories SqlServerFactory and MySqlFactory. This will work! But many of my database methods have pretty much the same structure except that in one, we are using an SqlConnection and SqlCommand and the other we are using a MySqlConnection and the rest of the method code is basically the same. Below is a example of one of my SELECT methods:
public DataTable GetSpyList()
{
DataTable dt = new DataTable();
using (OleDbConnection conn = new OleDbConnection(cs))
{
try
{
string query = "SELECT * FROM SpyList";
OleDbDataAdapter da = new OleDbDataAdapter(query, conn);
conn.Open();
da.Fill(dt);
conn.Close();
return dt;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
return null;
}
}
}
How can I reduce code repetition by making the above method work for any type of data provider? Is this something that can be achieved by using DbProviderFactories?

Yes, the static DbProviderFactories and the DbProviderFactory class are fit for your purposes.
Of course, every abstraction like this is based on the common functionality of the base classes DbConnection, DbCommand, DbDataReader, DbDataAdapter.
For example. In the MySqlDataReader class you could find an overload of the method GetString that takes as input the name of the column to retrieve. This overload doesn't exists in the SqlDataReader and you need to use the ordinal position of the column to retrieve data. So, in case of DbProviderFactory you could use only the common version of GetString between the MySql provider and the Sql Server provider (IE using the GetString method that takes the ordinal position). Luckily, Intellisense helps a lot to avoid this error.
You could rewrite your code as
public DataTable GetSpyList()
{
DbProviderFactory fac = DbProviderFactories.GetFactory("MySQL.Data.MySqlClient");
DataTable dt = new DataTable();
using(DbConnection conn = fac.CreateConnection())
{
cn.ConnectionString = cs
DbDataAdapter da = fac.CreateDataAdapter();
da.SelectCommand = conn.CreateCommand();
da.SelectCommand.CommandText = "SELECT * FROM SpyList";
try
{
conn.Open();
da.Fill(dt);
return dt;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
return null;
}
}
}
This example uses a fixed name for the Data Provider, but of course, you could read this name from some kind of configuration file and have your program change its underlying database changing the entry in the configuration file.

Why does my application hang while trying to close a SqlConnection object?

I am trying to get column information in C# from a SQL table on SQL Server. I am following the example in this link: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/310107 My program strangely gets hung up when it tries to close the connection. If the connection is not closed, the program exits without any Exceptions. Here's my code:
SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(#"MyConnectionString");
connection.Open();
SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand("SELECT * FROM MyTable", connection);
SqlDataReader reader = command.ExecuteReader(CommandBehavior.KeyInfo); // If this is changed to CommandBehavior.SchemaOnly, the program runs fast.
DataTable table = reader.GetSchemaTable();
Console.WriteLine(table.Rows.Count);
connection.Close(); // Alternatively If this line is commented out, the program runs fast.
Putting the SqlConnection inside a using block also causes the application to hang unless CommandBehavior.KeyInfo is changed to CommandBehavior.SchemaOnly.
using (SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(#"MyConnectionString"))
{
connection.Open();
SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand("SELECT * FROM MyTable", connection);
SqlDataReader reader = command.ExecuteReader(CommandBehavior.KeyInfo); // If this is changed to CommandBehavior.SchemaOnly, the program runs fast even here in the using
DataTable table = reader.GetSchemaTable();
Console.WriteLine(table.Rows.Count);
}
The table in question has over 3 million rows, but since I am only obtaining the Schema information, I would think this wouldn't be an issue. My question is: Why does my application get stuck while trying to close a connection?
SOLUTION: Maybe this isn't optimal, but it does work; I inserted a command.Cancel(); statement right before Close is called on connection:
SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(#"MyConnectionString");
connection.Open();
SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand("SELECT * FROM MyTable", connection);
SqlDataReader reader = command.ExecuteReader(CommandBehavior.KeyInfo); // If this is changed to CommandBehavior.SchemaOnly, the program runs fast.
DataTable table = reader.GetSchemaTable();
Console.WriteLine(table.Rows.Count);
command.Cancel(); // <-- This is it.
connection.Close(); // Alternatively If this line is commented out, the program runs fast.

I saw something like this, long ago. For me, it was because I did something like:
SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand("SELECT * FROM MyTable", connection);
SqlDataReader reader = command.ExecuteReader();
// here, I started looping, reading one record at a time
// and after reading, say, 100 records, I'd break out of the loop
connection.Close(); // this would hang
The problem is that the command appears to want to complete. That is, go through the entire result set. And my result set had millions of records. It would finish ... eventually.
I solved the problem by adding a call to command.Cancel() before calling connection.Close().
See http://www.informit.com/guides/content.aspx?g=dotnet&seqNum=610 for more information.

It looks right to me overall and I think you need a little optimization. In addition to the above suggestion regarding avoiding DataReader, I will recommend to use connection pooling. You can get the details from here :
http://www.techrepublic.com/article/take-advantage-of-adonet-connection-pooling/6107854

Could you try this?
DataTable dt = new DataTable();
using(SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("yourConnectionString"))
{
SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("SET FMTONLY ON; " + yourQueryString + "; SET FMTONLY OFF;",conn);
conn.Open();
dt.Load(cmd.ExecuteReader());
}
SET FMTONLY ON/OFF from MSDN seems the way to go

There is an specific way to do this, using SMO (SQL Server management objects)
You can get the collection of tables in the database, and then read the properties of the table you're interested in (columns, keys, and all imaginable properties)
This is what SSMS uses to get and set properties of all database objects.
Look at this references:
Database.Tables Property
Table class
This is a full example of how to get table properties:
Retrieving SQL Server 2005 Database Info Using SMO: Database Info, Table Info
This will allow you to get all the possible information from the database in a very easy way. there are plenty of samples in VB.NET and C#.

I would try something like this. This ensures all items are cleaned up - and avoids using DataReader. You don't need this unless you have unusually large amounts of data that would cause memory issues.
public void DoWork(string connectionstring)
{
DataTable dt = new DataTable("MyData");
using (var connection = new SqlConnection(connectionstring))
{
connection.Open();
string commandtext = "SELECT * FROM MyTable";
using(var adapter = new SqlDataAdapter(commandtext, connection))
{
adapter.Fill(dt);
}
connection.Close();
}
Console.WriteLine(dt.Rows.Count);
}

c# windows forms / basic data grid

One of the problems I am having with c# is that there seems to be so much information online that I am having trouble finding the right answer to the most basic of questions.
I am trying to do something simple:
I have a button, I click it, it queries the database and populates a datagrid on my windows form.
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
SqlConnection c = new SqlConnection("Data Source = (local); Integrated Security = true; Initial Catalog = pubs; ");
c.Open();
// 2
// Create new DataAdapter
SqlCommand cmd = c.CreateCommand();
cmd.CommandText = #" SELECT * FROM Authors ";
SqlDataReader reader = cmd.ExecuteReader();
dataGridView1.DataSource = reader;
dataGridView1.DataBind();
}
Error 1 'System.Windows.Forms.DataGridView' does not contain a definition for 'DataBind' and no extension method 'DataBind' accepting a first argument of type 'System.Windows.Forms.DataGridView' could be found.....
I am probably missing a "using directive" but which one? Multiple Google searches tell me how to bind a Yahoo RSS Feed to a gridview or provide various obscure details on "using directives".
Maybe I am using the SqlDataReader incorrectly. Should I be using SqlAdapter instead? What happened to all the good basic tutorials online for windows c# forms? A few months ago I found a couple great tutorials, but they seem to have lost their pageranking and I cannot find them anymore using basic google searches.

You're not missing a using directive; it's just that the WinForms DataGridView doesn't have a DataBind method. Just assigning DataSource is enough to get the binding to happen; you don't need to call a method as well.
However, I don't think you can assign a SqlDataReader as the DataSource. According to the DataSource property documentation in MSDN, the DataSource must be an IList, an IListSource, an IBindingList or an IBindingListView. You will probably instead need to load the data into a DataTable or DataSet (or an object data source populated using an object-relational mapper), and use that as the DataSource.

Try this instead:
using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("your connection string"))
{
conn.Open();
using (SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand(#"SELECT * FROM Authors", conn))
{
using (SqlDataAdapter adap = new SqlDataAdapter(cmd))
{
DataTable dt = new DataTable();
adap.Fill(dt);
dataGridView1.DataSource = dt;
}
}
}
The DataGridView does not have a DataBind() method because it doesn't need one. Setting the DataSource property handles the binding for you. The using() blocks will automatically close and dispose of everything for you as well.
Note: you should replace "your connection string" with a valid connection string. I left yours out of my sample to avoid the horizontal scrollbars, and I'm not sure yours is valid anyway. You may get a runtime error when you run the code using your connection string. www.connectionstrings.com is a great resource for figuring out a valid connection string.
Update: instead of the nested using() blocks, you can also do it like this:
using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("..."))
using (SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand(#" SELECT * FROM Authors", conn))
using (SqlDataAdapter adap = new SqlDataAdapter(cmd))
{
conn.Open();
DataTable dt = new DataTable();
adap.Fill(dt);
dataGridView1.DataSource = dt;
}
I prefer the nested style, but it's "half of one, six dozen of the other" to me. Typically, I would encapsulate code like this into a class (called "DataGetter" or whatever) with a static method like:
public static DataTable GetData(string query)
{
// do all the connecting and adapting and filling and so forth
}
so that the code in your button click would be as simple as:
dataGridView1.DataSource = DataGetter.GetData("SELECT * FROM AUTHORS");
However, I would not do this in any performance-critical section of my code, since you sometimes want to keep a SqlCommand object (and its SqlParameter collection) around between calls. You do not need to keep SqlConnection objects around between calls, thanks to connection pooling (in fact, you don't want to keep them around under any circumstances).