I'm having trouble with a query written in LINQ and Lambda. So far, I'm getting a lot of errors here's my code:
int id = 1;
var query = database.Posts.Join(database.Post_Metas,
post => database.Posts.Where(x => x.ID == id),
meta => database.Post_Metas.Where(x => x.Post_ID == id),
(post, meta) => new { Post = post, Meta = meta });
I'm not sure if this query is correct.
I find that if you're familiar with SQL syntax, using the LINQ query syntax is much clearer, more natural, and makes it easier to spot errors:
var id = 1;
var query =
from post in database.Posts
join meta in database.Post_Metas on post.ID equals meta.Post_ID
where post.ID == id
select new { Post = post, Meta = meta };
If you're really stuck on using lambdas though, your syntax is quite a bit off. Here's the same query, using the LINQ extension methods:
var id = 1;
var query = database.Posts // your starting point - table in the "from" statement
.Join(database.Post_Metas, // the source table of the inner join
post => post.ID, // Select the primary key (the first part of the "on" clause in an sql "join" statement)
meta => meta.Post_ID, // Select the foreign key (the second part of the "on" clause)
(post, meta) => new { Post = post, Meta = meta }) // selection
.Where(postAndMeta => postAndMeta.Post.ID == id); // where statement
You could go two ways with this. Using LINQPad (invaluable if you're new to LINQ) and a dummy database, I built the following queries:
Posts.Join(
Post_metas,
post => post.Post_id,
meta => meta.Post_id,
(post, meta) => new { Post = post, Meta = meta }
)
or
from p in Posts
join pm in Post_metas on p.Post_id equals pm.Post_id
select new { Post = p, Meta = pm }
In this particular case, I think the LINQ syntax is cleaner (I change between the two depending upon which is easiest to read).
The thing I'd like to point out though is that if you have appropriate foreign keys in your database, (between post and post_meta) then you probably don't need an explicit join unless you're trying to load a large number of records. Your example seems to indicate that you are trying to load a single post and its metadata. Assuming that there are many post_meta records for each post, then you could do the following:
var post = Posts.Single(p => p.ID == 1);
var metas = post.Post_metas.ToList();
If you want to avoid the n+1 problem, then you can explicitly tell LINQ to SQL to load all of the related items in one go (although this may be an advanced topic for when you're more familiar with L2S). The example below says "when you load a Post, also load all of its records associated with it via the foreign key represented by the 'Post_metas' property":
var dataLoadOptions = new DataLoadOptions();
dataLoadOptions.LoadWith<Post>(p => p.Post_metas);
var dataContext = new MyDataContext();
dataContext.LoadOptions = dataLoadOptions;
var post = Posts.Single(p => p.ID == 1); // Post_metas loaded automagically
It is possible to make many LoadWith calls on a single set of DataLoadOptions for the same type, or many different types. If you do this lots though, you might just want to consider caching.
Daniel has a good explanation of the syntax relationships, but I put this document together for my team in order to make it a little simpler for them to understand. Hope this helps someone
Your key selectors are incorrect. They should take an object of the type of the table in question and return the key to use in the join. I think you mean this:
var query = database.Posts.Join(database.Post_Metas,
post => post.ID,
meta => meta.Post_ID,
(post, meta) => new { Post = post, Meta = meta });
You can apply the where clause afterwards, not as part of the key selector.
Posting because when I started LINQ + EntityFramework, I stared at these examples for a day.
If you are using EntityFramework, and you have a navigation property named Meta on your Post model object set up, this is dirt easy. If you're using entity and don't have that navigation property, what are you waiting for?
database
.Posts
.Where(post => post.ID == id)
.Select(post => new { post, post.Meta });
If you're doing code first, you'd set up the property thusly:
class Post {
[Key]
public int ID {get; set}
public int MetaID { get; set; }
public virtual Meta Meta {get; set;}
}
I've done something like this;
var certificationClass = _db.INDIVIDUALLICENSEs
.Join(_db.INDLICENSECLAsses,
IL => IL.LICENSE_CLASS,
ILC => ILC.NAME,
(IL, ILC) => new { INDIVIDUALLICENSE = IL, INDLICENSECLAsse = ILC })
.Where(o =>
o.INDIVIDUALLICENSE.GLOBALENTITYID == "ABC" &&
o.INDIVIDUALLICENSE.LICENSE_TYPE == "ABC")
.Select(t => new
{
value = t.PSP_INDLICENSECLAsse.ID,
name = t.PSP_INDIVIDUALLICENSE.LICENSE_CLASS,
})
.OrderBy(x => x.name);
It could be something like
var myvar = from a in context.MyEntity
join b in context.MyEntity2 on a.key equals b.key
select new { prop1 = a.prop1, prop2= b.prop1};
This linq query Should work for you. It will get all the posts that have post meta.
var query = database.Posts.Join(database.Post_Metas,
post => post.postId, // Primary Key
meta => meat.postId, // Foreign Key
(post, meta) => new { Post = post, Meta = meta });
Equivalent SQL Query
Select * FROM Posts P
INNER JOIN Post_Metas pm ON pm.postId=p.postId
Query Syntax for LINQ Join
var productOrderQuery = from product in Product.Setup()//outer sequence
join order in OrderDetails.Setup()//inner sequence
on product.Id equals order.ProductId //key selector
select new//result selector
{
OrderId = order.Id,
ProductId = product.Id,
PurchaseDate = order.PurchaseDate,
ProductName = product.Name,
ProductPrice = product.Price
};
Method Syntax for LINQ Join
var productOrderMethod = Product.Setup().//outer sequence
Join(OrderDetails.Setup(), //inner sequence
product => product.Id//key selector
,order=> order.ProductId //key selector
,(product,order)=> //projection result
new
{
OrderId = order.Id,
ProductId = product.Id,
PurchaseDate = order.PurchaseDate,
ProductName = product.Name,
ProductPrice = product.Price
}
);
Product.cs for reference
class Product
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public decimal Price { get; set; }
public static IEnumerable<Product> Setup()
{
return new List<Product>()
{
new Product(){Id=1, Name="Bike", Price=30.33M },
new Product(){Id=2, Name="Car", Price=50.33M },
new Product(){Id=3, Name="Bus", Price=60.33M }
};
}
}
OrderDetails.cs class for reference
class OrderDetails
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public virtual int ProductId { get; set; }
public DateTime PurchaseDate { get; set; }
public static IEnumerable<OrderDetails> Setup()
{
return new List<OrderDetails>()
{
new OrderDetails(){Id=1, ProductId=1, PurchaseDate= DateTime.Now },
new OrderDetails(){Id=2, ProductId=1, PurchaseDate=DateTime.Now.AddDays(-1) },
new OrderDetails(){Id=3, ProductId=2, PurchaseDate=DateTime.Now.AddDays(-2) }
};
}
}
1 equals 1 two different table join
var query = from post in database.Posts
join meta in database.Post_Metas on 1 equals 1
where post.ID == id
select new { Post = post, Meta = meta };
Related
This is a .NET Core Web API Task method. I have a flat table that I need to convert into a nested DTOs. The first DTO works but I can't seem to get the second DTO to nest after grouping.
I know I have done the grouping correctly. I am just not sure the second level nesting of the DTO is done correctly, it complains about not being able to translate to some type.
LINQ Query to put data in a nested object
Can someone point me in the right track?
public async Task<List<PointCardViewModel>> GetPointCards() {
var data = (from s in db.Students
join dc in db.DailyCards on s.StudentId equals dc.StudentId
join dcli in db.DailyCardLineItems on dc.CardId equals dcli.CardId
join dcob in db.DailyCardOtherBehaviors on dc.CardId equals dcob.CardId
select new
{
s.StudentName,
s.StudentGrade,
dc.CardId,
dc.CardDate,
dcli.ClassParticipationPoints,
dcli.AssignmentCompletionPoints,
dcli.BonusHomeworkPoints,
dcli.ClassPeriod,
dcob.PersonalAppearancePoints,
dcob.LunchPoints,
dcob.RecessOtherPoints,
dcob.AmHomeroomPoints,
dcob.PmHomeroomPoints
});
var queryPointCards = (data
.GroupBy(x => new
{
x.CardId,
x.StudentGrade,
x.StudentName,
x.CardDate,
x.PersonalAppearancePoints,
x.LunchPoints,
x.RecessOtherPoints,
x.AmHomeroomPoints,
x.PmHomeroomPoints
})
.Select(x => new PointCardViewModel()
{
CardId = x.Key.CardId,
StudentName = x.Key.StudentName,
Grade = x.Key.StudentGrade,
EvaluationDate = x.Key.CardDate,
PersonalAppearancePoints = x.Key.PersonalAppearancePoints,
LunchPoints = x.Key.LunchPoints,
RecessOtherPoints = x.Key.RecessOtherPoints,
AMHomeRoomPoints = x.Key.AmHomeroomPoints,
PMHomeRoomPoints = x.Key.PmHomeroomPoints,
//LineItems = null --> This works!! But not the below
LineItems = x.Select(c => new LineItemViewModel
{
ClassPeriod = c.ClassPeriod,
BonusHomeworkPoints = c.BonusHomeworkPoints,
ClassParticipationPoints = c.ClassParticipationPoints,
AssignmentCompletionPoints = c.AssignmentCompletionPoints
})
}
)
).ToListAsync();
if (db != null)
{
return await queryPointCards;
}
return null;
}
You have hit limitation of Grouping. After groping you cannot access to group items. Only fields from 'Key' and aggregation functions are allowed.
So just put data.AsEnumerable() and do grouping on the client side.
I have the following database. A list of companies. Each company has multiple employees and multiple contractors.
dbo.Companies (CompanyId, Name)
dbo.Employees (Id, CompanyId, Name ...)
dbo.Contractors(Id, CompanyId, Name...)
I want to get output like so
CompanyName #Employees #Contractors
abc 0 10
xyz 25 999
I am trying to avoid doing 2 queries, one to get contractors and one to get employees and then merging them. Is there a way to get it done in one go?
n.b. i have
class CompanySummary{
string Name {get; set;}
int EmpCount {get; set;}
int ConCount {get; set;}
}
so I can use a collection of this type as result
If you have defined navigation properties (and if you haven't, may be it's a good time to do that), the query should be quite simple:
var query = from c in db.Companies
select new CompanySummary
{
Name = c.Name,
EmpCount = c.Employees.Count(),
ConCount = c.Contractors.Count(),
};
Of course you can do that manually, but the above is the preferred way with EF:
var query = from c in db.Companies
select new CompanySummary
{
Name = c.Name,
EmpCount = db.Employees.Count(e => e.CompanyId == c.Id),
ConCount = db.Contractors.Count(cc => cc.CompanyId == c.Id),
};
In both cases you'll get a single SQL query.
If you are using Entity Framework to communicate with the database and have the tables linked with foreign keys you can probably do it in one query. It would look something like this:
IEnumerable<CompanySummary> companySummary = null;
using (CompanyEntities dbContext = new CompanyEntities())
{
companySummary = dbContext.Companies
.Include(company => company.Employees)
.Include(company => company.Contractors)
.Select(company => new CompanySummary
{
Name = company.Name,
EmpCount = company.Employees.Count(),
ConCount = company.Contractors.Count()
});
}
I'm looking for the counterpart of Msql query:
SELECT per.*,add.addressDescription FROM Persons per
JOIN Address add ON per.AddressId = add.AddressId
I have this query:
var query = persons.JOIN(address,per = person.addressId,add = addressId
(per,add) =>
new Persons{
addressDescription = add.addressDescription,
PersonId = per.PersonId,
PersonFirstName = per.PersonFirstName
PersonLastName = per.PersonLastName})
Is there a way to populate Persons.addressDescription without assigning individually the other properties of Persons? Imagine if Persons have 10 more properties.
I would like to refrain from using loops like:
foreach(Person person in PersonList)
{
foreach(Address address in AddressList)
{
if(person.addressId == address.addressId){
person.addressDescription = address.addressDescription
}
}
}
var query = persons.join(address,
per = person.addressId,
add = addressId
(per,add) =>
{
per.addressDescription = add.addressDescription;
return per;
});
var id = 1;
var query = database.Posts // your starting point - table in the "from" statement
.Join(database.Post_Metas, // the source table of the inner join
post => post.ID, // Select the primary key (the first part of the "on" clause in an sql "join" statement)
meta => meta.Post_ID, // Select the foreign key (the second part of the "on" clause)
(post, meta) => new { Post = post, Meta = meta }) // selection
.Where(postAndMeta => postAndMeta.Post.ID == id); // where statement
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.
I have two lists comprised of different complex-objects, and each one is from 2 separate data-sources. One list may-or-may-not contain records. When any records exist in the "optional" list I need the "normal" list to be further-filtered.
Unfortunately, I can only find very simple examples here and online, which is why I am asking this question.
The Pseudo-Logic Goes Like This:
When QuickFindMaterial records exist, get all DataSource records where query.Name is in the QuickFindMaterial.Material collection. If no QuickFindMaterial records exist do not affect the final result. Lastly, select all distinct DataSourcerecords.
The Classes Looks Like:
public class QuickFindMaterial
{
public string SiteId { get; set; }
public string Material { get; set; }
}
The Code Looks Like:
I have commented-out my failed WHERE logic below
var dataSource = DocumentCollectionService.ListQuickFind();
var quickFindMaterial = ListMaterialBySiteID(customerSiteId);
var distinct = (from query in dataSource
select new
{
ID = query.DocumentID,
Library = query.DocumentLibrary,
ModifiedDate = query.DocumentModifiedDate,
Name = query.DocumentName,
Title = query.DocumentTitle,
Type = query.DocumentType,
Url = query.DocumentUrl,
})
//.Where(x => x.Name.Contains(quickFindMaterial.SelectMany(q => q.Material)))
//.Where(x => quickFindMaterial.Contains(x.Name))
.Distinct();
I think this is what you want:
.Where(x => !quickFindMaterial.Any() || quickFindMaterial.Any(y => x.Name == y.Material))
You could join on Name -> Material
Example:
var distinct = (from query in dataSource
join foo in quickFindMaterial on query.Name equals foo.Material
select new
{
ID = query.DocumentID,
Library = query.DocumentLibrary,
ModifiedDate = query.DocumentModifiedDate,
Name = query.DocumentName,
Title = query.DocumentTitle,
Type = query.DocumentType,
Url = query.DocumentUrl,
}).Distinct();