We Keep Coding

C# LINQ statement with joins, group by and having then mapped into list object

I have a model called ElectricityBillSiteExceeding that looks like this:
public class ElectricityBillSiteExceeding
{
public string GroupInvoiceNumber { get; set; }
public int ElectricityBillMainId { get; set; }
public string SiteNo { get; set; }
public decimal BillSiteTotal { get; set; }
public decimal MaximumAmount { get; set; }
}
I want to create a list of this type and use it to feed a grid on one of my pages, the purpose is to show which site has bills that exceed the max amount allowed.
I have written the SQL which will give me this dataset, it looks like this:
SELECT SUM(ElectricityBillSiteTotal),
ebs.ElectricityBillMainId,
SiteNo,
ebm.GroupInvoiceNumber,
es.MaximumAmount
FROM dbo.ElectricityBillSites ebs
LEFT JOIN dbo.ElectricityBillMains ebm
ON ebs.ElectricityBillMainId = ebm.ElectricityBillMainId
LEFT JOIN dbo.ElectricitySites es
ON ebs.SiteNo = es.SiteNumber
GROUP BY ebs.ElectricityBillMainId, SiteNo, ebm.GroupInvoiceNumber, es.MaximumAmount
HAVING SUM(ElectricityBillSiteTotal) <> 0 AND SUM(ElectricityBillSiteTotal) > es.MaximumAmount
I'm now in my repository trying to write the method which will go to the database and fetch this dataset so that I can power my grid for the user to see.
This is where I'm struggling. I have written a basic LINQ statement to select from a couple of tables, however I'm unsure how I can incorporate the group by and having clause from my SQL and also how I can then turn this IQueryable object into my List<ElectricityBillSiteExceeding> object.
What I have so far
public List<ElectricityBillSiteExceeding> GetAllElectricityBillSiteExceedings()
{
var groupedBillSitesThatExceed = from billSites in _context.ElectricityBillSites
join billMains in _context.ElectricityBillMains on billSites.ElectricityBillMainId equals
billMains.ElectricityBillMainId
join sites in _context.ElectricitySites on billSites.SiteNo equals sites.SiteNumber
//TODO: group by total, mainId, siteNo, GroupInv, MaxAmt and Having no total = 0 and total > max
select new
{
groupInv = billMains.GroupInvoiceNumber,
mainId = billMains.ElectricityBillMainId,
siteNo = billSites.SiteNo,
total = billSites.ElectricityBillSiteTotal,
max = sites.MaximumAmount
};
//TODO: Map the result set of the linq to my model and return
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
Can anyone point me in the right direction here?

The correct Linq query for your sql is the following. See Left Join to understand the DefaultIfEmpty and also the notes there about the use of ?. in the following group by.
(About the having - in linq you just provide a where after the group by)
var result = from ebs in ElectricityBillSites
join ebm in ElectricityBillMains on ebs.ElectricityBillMainId equals ebm.ElectricityBillMainId into ebmj
from ebm in ebmj.DefaultIfEmpty()
join es in ElectricitySites on ebs.SiteNo equals es.SiteNumber into esj
from es in esj.DefaultIfEmpty()
group new { ebs, ebm, es } by new { ebs.ElectricityBillMainId, ebs.SiteNo, ebm?.GroupInvoiceNumber, es?.MaximumAmount } into grouping
let sum = grouping.Sum(item => item.ebs.ElectricityBillSiteTotal)
where sum > 0 && sum > grouping.Key.MaximumAmount
orderby sum descending
select new ElectricityBillSiteExceeding
{
GroupInvoiceNumber = grouping.Key.GroupInvoiceNumber,
ElectricityBillMainId = grouping.Key.ElectricityBillMainId,
SiteNo = grouping.Key.SiteNo,
BillSiteTotal = sum,
MaximumAmount = grouping.Key.MaximumAmount
};
The error you get:
An expression tree lambda may not contain a null propagating operator
By reading this I conclude that you have an older versino of the provider and thus replace the group by code from the code above with the following:
let GroupInvoiceNumber = ebm == null ? null : ebm.GroupInvoiceNumber
let MaximumAmount = es == null ? 0 : es.MaximumAmount
group new { ebs, ebm, es } by new { ebs.ElectricityBillMainId, ebs.SiteNo, GroupInvoiceNumber, MaximumAmount } into grouping

Before getting into grouping , you need to be aware that the default join in LINQ is always an INNER JOIN. Take a look at the MSDN page How to: Perform Left Outer Joins. However, in the solution I'm presenting below, I'm using INNER JOINs since you are using fields from the other tables in your grouping and having clauses.
For reference on grouping using LINQ, check out How to: Group Query Results on MSDN.
A solution specific to your case is going to look something like:
public List<ElectricityBillSiteExceeding> GetAllElectricityBillSiteExceedings()
{
var qryGroupedBillSitesThatExceed = from billSites in _context.ElectricityBillSites
join billMains in _context.ElectricityBillMains on billSites.ElectricityBillMainId equals billMains.ElectricityBillMainId
join sites in _context.ElectricitySites on billSites.SiteNo equals sites.SiteNumber
where billSites.ElectricityBillSiteTotal != 0 && billSites.ElectricityBillSiteTotal > sites.MaximumAmount
group new { billMains.GroupInvoiceNumber, billMains.ElectricityBillMainId, billSites.SiteNo, billSites.ElectricityBillSiteTotal, sites.MaximumAmount }
by new { billMains.GroupInvoiceNumber, billMains.ElectricityBillMainId, billSites.SiteNo, billSites.ElectricityBillSiteTotal, sites.MaximumAmount } into eGroup
select eGroup.Key;
var inMemGroupedBillSitesThatExceed = qryGroupedBillSitesThatExceed.AsEnumerable();
var finalResult = inMemGroupedBillSitesThatExceed.Select(r => new ElectricityBillSiteExceeding()
{
BillSiteTotal = r.ElectricityBillSiteTotal,
ElectricityBillMainId = r.ElectricityBillMainId,
GroupInvoiceNumber = r.GroupInvoiceNumber,
MaximumAmount = r.MaximumAmount,
SiteNo = r.SiteNo,
});
return finalResult.ToList();
}

This probably will be enough. You could use AutoMapper. It will trivialize mapping to classes.
var resultList = groupedBillSitesThatExceed
.AsEnumerable() //Query will be completed here and loaded from sql to memory
// From here we could use any of our class or methods
.Select(x => new ElectricityBillSiteExceeding
{
//Map your properties here
})
.ToList(); //Only if you want List instead IEnumerable
return resultList;

Linq - complex query - list in a list

I have this class:
public class RecipeLine
{
public List<string> PossibleNames { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public int Index { get; set; }
}
I have a list of multiple RecipeLine objects. For example, one of them looks like this:
Name: apple
PossibleNames: {red delicious, yellow delicious, ... }
Index = 3
I also have a table in my db which is called tblFruit and has 2 columns: name and id. the id isn't the same as the index in the class.
What I want to do is this:
for the whole list of RecipeLine objects, find all the records in tblFruit whose name is in PossibleNames, and give me back the index of the class and the id in the table. So we have a list in a list (a list of RecipeLine objects who have a list of strings). How can I do this with Linq in c#?

I'm pretty sure there isn't going to be a LINQ statement that you can construct for this that will create a SQL query to get the data exactly how you want. Assuming tblFruit doesn't have too much data, pull down the whole table and process it in memory with something like...
var result = tblFruitList.Select((f) => new {Id = f.id, Index = recipeLineList.Where((r) => r.PossibleNames.Contains(f.name)).Select((r) => r.Index).FirstOrDefault()});
Keeping in mind that Index will be 0 if there isn't a recipeLine with the tblFruit's name in it's PossibleNames list.
A more readable method that doesn't one-line it into a nasty linq statement is...
Class ResultItem {
int Index {get;set;}
int Id {get;set;}
}
IEnumerable<ResultItem> GetRecipeFruitList(IEnumerable<FruitItem> tblFruitList, IEnumerable<RecipeLine> recipeLineList) {
var result = new List<ResultItem>();
foreach (FruitItem fruitItem in tblFruitList) {
var match = recipeLineList.FirstOrDefault((r) => r.PossibleNames.Contains(fruitItem.Name));
if (match != null) {
result.Add(new ResultItem() {Index = match.Index, Id = fruitItem.Id});
}
}
return result;
}
If tblFruit has a lot of data you can try and pull down only those items that have a name in the RecipeLine list's of PossibleName lists with something like...
var allNames = recipeLineList.SelectMany((r) => r.PossibleNames).Distinct();
var tblFruitList = DbContext.tblFruit.Where((f) => allNames.Contains(f.Name));

To get all the fruits within your table whose Name is in PossibleNames use the following:
var query = myData.Where(x => myRecipeLines.SelectMany(y => y.PossibleNames).Contains(x.Name));

I don't think you can do this in a single step.
I would first create a map of the possible names to indexes:
var possibleNameToIndexMap = recipes
.SelectMany(r => r.PossibleNames.Select(possibleName => new { Index = r.Index, PossbileName = possibleName }))
.ToDictionary(x => x.PossbileName, x => x.Index);
Then, I would retrieve the matching names from the table:
var matchingNamesFromTable = TblFruits
.Where(fruit => possibleNameToIndexMap.Keys.Contains(fruit.Name))
.Select(fruit => fruit.Name);
Then you can use the names retrieved from the tables as keys into your original map:
var result = matchingNamesFromTable
.Select(name => new { Name = name, Index = possibleNameToIndexMap[name]});
Not fancy, but it should be easy to read and maintain.

Sort List based on Array

I am trying to sort a custom list based on a string array, but I am failing miserably e.g. its not sorting the list at all,
Public class CrateOrder
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public Stream OrderStream { get; set; }
}
string[] selectedFruits = {"Apple", "Mango"}; // in real get from web services
var selectedFruitsList = selectedFruits.ToList();
List<CrateOrder> cFruit = GetCrateOrderFromWebServices();
var sorted = cFruit.OrderBy(s => selectedFruitsList.IndexOf(s.Name)).ToList();
It's not sorting the list properly, I want CrateOrder list item to be ordered based on selectedFruits...

If the Name property of your fruit does not match your ordering list exactly, IndexOf will always return -1. To get around this specify a case-insensitive StringComparison, but that is not available as an overload to IndexOf so you have to use a slightly more complex method:
var sorted = cFruit.OrderBy(
s => selectedFruitsList.FindIndex(
x => x.Equals(s.Name, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) )
.ToList();

You are almost there. The code orders the fruit from selectedFruitsList after all other items, because OrderBy order is ascending, and they are the only ones for which a non-negative number is returned.
To fix this, reverse selectedFruits, and negate the result of IndexOf, like this:
string[] selectedFruits = {"Mango", "Apple"};
...
var sorted = cFruit.OrderBy(s => -selectedFruitsList.IndexOf(s.Name)).ToList();
Alternatively, you could expand the code to deal with negative indexes explicitly:
string[] selectedFruits = {"Apple", "Mango"};
...
var sorted = cFruit.OrderBy(s => {
int index = selectedFruitsList.IndexOf(s.Name);
return index < 0 ? int.MaxValue : index;
}).ToList();

I wasn't aware if its case sensitive, can i add ignore culture to it
No - Array.IndexOf does not have parameters that let you customize the equality comparison.
Just change all of your selectedfruits and the search value to lower case:
string[] selectedFruits = {"Apple", "Mango"}; // in real get from web services
var selectedFruitsList = selectedFruits.Select(s => s.ToUpperInvariant()).ToList();
List<CrateOrder> cFruit = GetCrateOrderFromWebServices();
var sorted = cFruit.OrderBy(s => selectedFruitsList.IndexOf(s.Name.ToUpperInvariant())).ToList;

Storing the list items into a variable after filtering by using linq

I got a list of items, want to filter the list based on column distinct value(i.e based on Level) and also after filtering need to get the count and store them as an int variable.
Can anyone please help me.
**List**
Public Class Totalitems
{
public string ItemName;
public string ItemId;
public string ItemGroup;
public int Level;
}
Id= "123asd";
List<Totalitems> l_items = this.getslist(Id);
/*How to filter based on distinct level */
/* var filteredItems = (
from p in l_items
select p.Level)
.Distinct(); */
**Finally:**
//Stores the elements contained in the List into a variable
int totalItemsafterFiltering = l_FilteredItems.Count;

You want to use GroupBy for this task:
var numberOfDifferentLevels = l_items.GroupBy(x => x.Level).Count();
GroupBy is especially useful, if you want to do something with the actual elements in the group. For example, you might want to know how many items per level there are:
var itemsPerLevel = l_items.GroupBy(x => x.Level)
.Select(x => new { Level = x.Key,
NumberOfItems = x.Count() });
Another approach when you really only care about the number of distinct levels, is the following:
var numberOfDifferentLevels = l_items.Select(x => x.Level).Distinct().Count();

Is there any way to reduce duplication in these two linq queries

Building a bunch of reports, have to do the same thing over and over with different fields
public List<ReportSummary> ListProducer()
{
return (from p in Context.stdReports
group p by new { p.txt_company, p.int_agencyId }
into g
select new ReportSummary
{
PKi = g.Key.int_agencyId,
Name = g.Key.txt_company,
Sum = g.Sum(foo => foo.lng_premium),
Count = g.Count()
}).OrderBy(q => q.Name).ToList();
}
public List<ReportSummary> ListCarrier()
{
return (from p in Context.stdReports
group p by new { p.txt_carrier, p.int_carrierId }
into g
select new ReportSummary
{
PKi = g.Key.int_carrierId,
Name = g.Key.txt_carrier,
Sum = g.Sum(foo => foo.lng_premium),
Count = g.Count()
}).OrderBy(q => q.Name).ToList();
}
My Mind is drawing a blank on how i might be able to bring these two together.

It looks like the only thing that changes are the names of the grouping parameters. Could you write a wrapper function that accepts lambdas specifying the grouping parameters? Or even a wrapper function that accepts two strings and then builds raw T-SQL, instead of using LINQ?
Or, and I don't know if this would compile, can you alias the fields in the group statement so that the grouping construct can always be referenced the same way, such as g.Key.id1 and g.Key.id2? You could then pass the grouping construct into the ReportSummary constructor and do the left-hand/right-hand assignment in one place. (You'd need to pass it as dynamic though, since its an anonymous object at the call site)

You could do something like this:
public List<ReportSummary> GetList(Func<Record, Tuple<string, int>> fieldSelector)
{
return (from p in Context.stdReports
group p by fieldSelector(p)
into g
select new ReportSummary
{
PKi = g.Key.Item2
Name = g.Key.Item1,
Sum = g.Sum(foo => foo.lng_premium),
Count = g.Count()
}).OrderBy(q => q.Name).ToList();
}
And then you could call it like this:
var summary = GetList(rec => Tuple.Create(rec.txt_company, rec.int_agencyId));
or:
var summary = GetList(rec => Tuple.Create(rec.txt_carrier, rec.int_carrierId));
Of course, you'll want to replace Record with whatever type Context.stdReports is actually returning.
I haven't checked to see if that will compile, but you get the idea.

Since all that changes between the two queries is the group key, parameterize it. Since it's a composite key (has more than one value within), you'll need to create a simple class which can hold those values (with generic names).
In this case, to parameterize it, make the key selector a parameter to your function. It would have to be an expression and the method syntax to get this to work. You could then generalize it into a function:
public class GroupKey
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
private IQueryable<ReportSummary> GetReport(
Expression<Func<stdReport, GroupKey>> groupKeySelector)
{
return Context.stdReports
.GroupBy(groupKeySelector)
.Select(g => new ReportSummary
{
PKi = g.Key.Id,
Name = g.Key.Name,
Sum = g.Sum(report => report.lng_premium),
Count = g.Count(),
})
.OrderBy(summary => summary.Name);
}
Then just make use of this function in your queries using the appropriate key selectors.
public List<ReportSummary> ListProducer()
{
return GetReport(r =>
new GroupKey
{
Id = r.int_agencyId,
Name = r.txt_company,
})
.ToList();
}
public List<ReportSummary> ListCarrier()
{
return GetReport(r =>
new GroupKey
{
Id = r.int_carrierId,
Name = r.txt_carrier,
})
.ToList();
}
I don't know what types you have mapped for your entities so I made some assumptions. Use whatever is appropriate in your case.