I have the following fields in my model:
public virtual IEnumerable<Person> Authors { get; set; }
public virtual IEnumerable<ExternalContributor> External_Contributors { get; set; }
[IndexField("Authors")]
[TypeConverter(typeof(IndexFieldGuidValueConverter))]
public virtual IEnumerable<Guid> AuthorIds { get; set; }
[IndexField("External Contributors")]
[TypeConverter(typeof(IndexFieldGuidValueConverter))]
public virtual IEnumerable<Guid> ExternalContributorIds { get; set; }
and I have a MultiList of GuiD in the fields "Authors" and "External Contributors". When I try to access those fields, "Authors" is populated with a list of objects, while External_Contributors is always empty.
Is there something obvious I am missing here?
EDIT:
Here are the definitions for Person and ExternalContributor:
[SitecoreType(TemplateId = "{2CD821FC-A334-49F4-93B9-CB0D8E7D71FF}", AutoMap = true)]
public class Person : ImageTemplate, ITagged, IViewImage, IViewCover, ISectors, ISpecialisms, IEquatable<Person>
{
public static string ParentPath = "/sitecore/content/Data/People";
public static Guid Template = new Guid("{2CD821FC-A334-49F4-93B9-CB0D8E7D71FF}");
[...various fields...]
}
}
[SitecoreType(TemplateId = "{7C35993C-140B-43FE-A00A-7ADA00A2A488}", AutoMap = true)]
public class ExternalContributor : ImageTemplate, ITagged, IViewImage, IEquatable<ExternalContributor>
{
public static string ParentPath = "/sitecore/content/Blue Rubicon Data/external-contributors";
public static Guid Template = new Guid("{7C35993C-140B-43FE-A00A-7ADA00A2A488}");
[...various fields...]
}
}
What about something like this:
[IndexField("External_Contributors")]
I'm not sure, but I've never seen a index field with spaces, I don't know if the fieldname translator (if it still exists) would fix it.
You should re-index your items after applying your change before it may work.
Related
As entity framework states, "Code first", here we go with the code first...
public class BaseModel
{
[Key]
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public DateTime DateCreated { get; set; }
public DateTime DateChanged { get; set; }
public BaseModel()
{
this.Id = Guid.NewGuid();
this.DateCreated = DateTime.Now;
this.DateChanged = DateTime.Now;
}
}
public class Association: BaseModel
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Type { get; set; }
public virtual List<Rule> Rules { get; set; }
public Association()
: base()
{
}
}
public class Rule: BaseModel
{
[ForeignKey("Association")]
public Guid AssociationId { get; set; }
//[Required]
public virtual Association Association { get; set; }
//[Required]
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Expression { get; set; }
public virtual List<Action> Actions { get; set; }
public Rule()
: base()
{
}
}
public class Action: BaseModel
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string ActionType { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Rule")]
public Guid RuleId { get; set; }
public virtual Rule Rule { get; set; }
public int Order { get; set; }
public Action()
: base()
{
}
}
So these are my four model classes that are using entity framework code first.
Each inherit from the baseclass, so they all have an Id Guid as Primary Key.
An Association has a list of rules. (Rule has FK to Association)
A Rule as has a list of actions. (Action has FK to Rule)
What I would like to do is only change and save the most upwards class = Association.
For example when deleting a rule, I would like this code to work:
public ActionResult DeleteRule(Guid assId, Guid ruleId)
{
Association ass = this.DataContext.Associations.FirstOrDefault(a => a.Id == assId);
ass.Rules.RemoveAll(r => r.Id == ruleId);
this.DataContext.SaveChanges();
return RedirectToAction("Index");
}
On the context.savechanges this is giving me this error:
'The operation failed: The relationship could not be changed because one or more of the foreign-key properties is non-nullable. When a change is made to a relationship, the related foreign-key property is set to a null value. If the foreign-key does not support null values, a new relationship must be defined, the foreign-key property must be assigned another non-null value, or the unrelated object must be deleted.'
This error also occurs when deleting an action.
Is there a way to change the most upper (Association) object AND ONLY changing things to this Association.
I DO NOT want to say context.Rules.remove(...) or context.actions.remove(...)
here's the source: http://server.thomasgielissen.be/files/mvctesting.zip
you need VS2012, all nuget packages are included in zip and you should be able to build and run the project.
Thanks in advance for your feedback!
Greetz,
Thomas
I you want to fix this issue, you should store your relations through junction tables. I don't think that you can achieve what you need, with this model.
However if you put a junction table(or entity) between your entities, you can easily remove child objects and update parent object.
For example, put a junction entity between Association and Rule:
public class AssociationRule: BaseModel
{
public Guid AssociationId { get; set; }
public Guid RuleId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("AssociationId")]
public virtual Association Association { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("RuleId")]
public virtual Rule Rule { get; set; }
public Association()
: base()
{
}
}
Now, you can easily remove any rule from any association:
public ActionResult DeleteRule(Guid assId, Guid ruleId)
{
AssociationRule assr = this.DataContext
.AssociationRuless
.FirstOrDefault(ar => ar.AssociationId == assId && ar.RuleId == ruleId);
this.DataContext.AssociationRules.Remove(assr);
this.DataContext.SaveChanges();
return RedirectToAction("Index");
}
We are using EF5, Code First approach to an MVC4 app that we're building. We are trying to update 1 property on an entity but keep getting errors. Here's what the class looks like which the context created:
public partial class Room
{
public Room()
{
this.Address = new HashSet<Address>();
}
public int RoomID { get; set; }
public Nullable<int> AddressID { get; set; }
public Nullable<int> ProductVersionID { get; set; }
public string PhoneNumber { get; set; }
public string AltPhone { get; set; }
public string RoomName { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public string Comments { get; set; }
public string Notes { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Address> Address { get; set; }
}
Here's our ViewModel for the view:
public class RoomDetailsViewModel
{
//public int RoomID { get; set; }
public string RoomName { get; set; }
public string PhoneNumber { get; set; }
public string AltPhone { get; set; }
public string Notes { get; set; }
public string StateCode { get; set; }
public string CountryName { get; set; }
public string ProductVersion { get; set; }
public int PVersionID { get; set; }
public List<SelectListItem> ProductVersions { get; set; }
public Room Room { get; set; }
}
Here's the Controller Action being called on "Save":
[HttpPost]
public virtual ActionResult UpdateRoom(RoomDetailsViewModel model)
{
var db = new DBContext();
bool b = ModelState.IsValid;
var rooms = db.Rooms;
var rm = rooms.Where(r => r.RoomID == model.Room.RoomID).Single();
//List<Address> address = db.Addresses.Where(a => a.AddressID == rm.AddressID).ToList<Address>();
rm.ProductVersionID = model.PVersionID;
//rm.Address = address;
db.Entry(rm).Property(r => r.ProductVersionID).IsModified = true;
//db.Entry(rm).State = System.Data.EntityState.Modified;
db.SaveChanges();
return View("RoomSaved", model);
}
All this view does is display data and allow the user to change the Product Version (from a SelectList), so, in the Room Entity, all we are updating is the ProductVersionID property, nothing else. We can get the data to display properly but when we click "save", we get this error:
An object of type 'System.Collections.Generic.List`1[[Models.Address,
Web.Mobile.TestSite, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral,
PublicKeyToken=null]]' cannot be set or removed from the Value
property of an EntityReference of type 'Models.Address'.
As you can see by the Controller Action, we've tried several different things but all seem to produce this error. I've tried to populate the model.Room.Address collection with an Address, without, but still get this error.
I read this StackOverflow article and this article as well but neither have solved my problem.
ANY help with this would be greatly appreciated!
After hours and hours of digging, turns out that EF did not import some of the PK's for my DB tables. What tipped me off to this was on the Room class, the PK RoomID did not have the [Key] attribute on it. I tried to reimport the table through the edmx but it never came through as a key (even though it's clearly marked PK in the DB). So, to get around it, I created a partial class of my DBContext and override the OnModelCreating event and included the key, like so:
public partial class DBContext
{
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<PluralizingTableNameConvention>();
modelBuilder.Entity<Models.Room>().HasEntitySetName("Rooms");
modelBuilder.Entity<Models.Room>().HasKey(r => r.RoomID);
}
}
Once this was done, the Action saved the record as hoped.
I hope this helps someone else!
I have a problem with NHibernate for a longtime which I solved by non-optimal ways/workarounds.
First of all, I'm using WCF REST to communicate with my client application. As you know, serializing persisted entities is not a best practise and always causes other problems. Thus, I always map my entities to DTO's with NHibernates Transformers. The problem is that I have entities which are more complex to use Transformers to convert them.
How can I map sub entities to sub dto's by using transformers or any other nhibernate feature?
Note: I don't want to use 3rd parties like Automapper.
These are the Entities and DTO's which I want to map. Variable names are exactly same with each other.
Entity Classes:
EntityType
public class crmEntityType : EntityModel<crmEntityType>
{
public crmEntityType()
{
Association = new List<crmEntityType>();
Fields = new List<crmCustomField>();
}
public virtual int ID { get; set; }
public virtual string Title { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<crmEntityType> Associations { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<crmCustomField> Fields { get; set; }
}
CustomFields
public class crmCustomField : EntityModel<crmCustomField>
{
public virtual int ID { get; set; }
public virtual string Name { get; set; }
public virtual crmEntityType EntityType { get; set; }
}
DTO's
EntityTypeDTO
[DataContract]
public class EntityTypeDTO
{
[DataMember]
public int ID { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public string Title { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public IList<CustomFieldDTO> Fields { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public int[] Associations { get; set; }
}
CustomFieldDTO
[DataContract]
public class CustomFieldDTO
{
[DataMember]
public int ID { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public string Name { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public int EntityType { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public int FieldType { get; set; }
}
I found my solution by spending my day and night to work it out. Finally, I've got the best solution I could find. I hope it helps someone in my condition some day.
This linq query works with just one database round-trip. I think it maps the classes in memory.
return (from entityType in Provider.GetSession().Query<crmEntityType>()
.Fetch(x => x.Association)
.Fetch(x => x.Fields)
.AsEnumerable()
select new EntityTypeDTO()
{
ID = entityType.ID,
Title = entityType.Title,
Association = entityType.Association.Distinct()
.Select(asc => asc.ID).ToArray<int>(),
Fields = entityType.Fields.Distinct()
.Select(fi => new CustomFieldDTO
{ ID = fi.ID,
Name = fi.Name,
Value = fi.Value,
EntityType = fi.EntityType.ID,
Type = fi.Type
}).ToList()
}).ToList();
My class:
[PersistClass]
public class ExternalAccount
{
public virtual AccountType AccountType { get; set; }
public virtual int Id { get; private set; }
public virtual User User { get; set; }
public virtual Dictionary<string, string> Parameters { get; set; }
public ExternalAccount()
{
Parameters = new Dictionary<string, string>();
}
}
The Dictionary is not getting mapped. I understand that automapping doesn't work by default with Dictionaries, how do I configure the mapping? All Parameters is is a list of key/value pairs - so I would expect them to be stored in a table with a foreign key to the externalaccount table. I know I can do this with another class - but it makes access to the parameters in the class more difficult - I'd rather have to configure the complexity once.
Please bear in mind I am new Fluent and to nHibernate.
Thanks
Using a simple class relationship such as the following:
public class Foo {
public virtual IDictionary<string, Bar> Bars { get; set; }
}
public class Bar {
public virtual string Type { get; set; }
public virtual int Value { get; set; }
}
You can map this with Fluent NHibernate in this way:
mapping.HasMany(x => x.Bars)
.AsMap(x => x.Type);
Where Bar.Type is used as the index field into the dictionary.
FluentNHibernate mapping for Dictionary
I'm using Sharp Architecture and have a number of situations where Value Objects are used in an Entity. Here is an obvious simple example:
public class Person : Entity
{
protected Person(){}
public Person(string personName)
{
this.PersonName = personName;
}
public virtual string PersonName { get; protected set;}
public virtual StreetAddress MailingAddress { get; set; }
}
public class StreetAddress : ValueObject
{
protected StreetAddress(){}
public StreetAddress(string address1, string address2, string city, string state, string postalCode, string country )
{
this.Address1 = address1;
this.Address2 = address2;
this.City = city;
this.State = state;
this.PostalCode = postalCode;
this.Country = country;
}
public virtual string Address1 { get; protected set; }
public virtual string Address2 { get; protected set; }
public virtual string City { get; protected set; }
public virtual string State { get; protected set; }
public virtual string PostalCode { get; protected set; }
public virtual string Country { get; protected set; }
}
This of course throws: An association from the table Person refers to an unmapped class: Project.Domain.StreetAddress
because the the AutoPersistenceModelGenerator only includes classes with type IEntityWithTypedId<>. Its not clear how Sharp Architecture expects this common condition to be implemented. Does this have to be handled with a bazillion overrides?
You could change the GetSetup() method in AutoPersistenceModelGenerator to something like:
private Action<AutoMappingExpressions> GetSetup()
{
return c =>
{
c.IsComponentType = type => type.BaseType == typeof (ValueObject);
};
}
I'll try to get the blogpost I saw covering this posted for credit.
You would want to map this as a component. You can use the mapping overrides in Fluent NHibernate to accomplish this.
I agree with Alec. I would map this as a component.
For more information on that, see this SO question:
AutoMapping a Composite Element in Fluent Nhibernate
There, you'll also find info on how to map a collection of composite elements.