MVC Model Object losing value - asp.net-mvc-4

ok... I'm Stumped
public ActionResult addSite(SiteViewModel aModel)
{
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
siteID = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();
aModel.siteId = siteID;
AddSite2Azure();
return RedirectToAction("manageProfile", "User");
}
else { return View(aModel); }
}
private void AddSite2Azure()
{
EmPmSiteEntity aSite = aEnty.AssetRegistry.CreateSite(new EmPmSiteEntity()
{
UserId = aUserId,
Id = aModel.siteId,
Name = aModel.siteName,
ZipCode = aModel.siteZip,
});
}
When Debugging, aModel.siteID has a guid at the end of my actionResult. But when we get to the next method, the value of aModel.siteID is "null"

It appears as though you have two scopes for aModel - one at the class level (not shown in your code), and one at the method level (passed as a parameter to addSite(...)).
You're setting the value of the method-level variable in addSite(). To use this value in AddSite2Azure(), either pass the method-level aModel to AddSite2Azure(), or set the class-level aModel in addSite() by using this.aModel.

Related

I want to keep 2 values for next save from preivous save. MVC 4

User enters PWS (public water system), LabID. Then clicks Save button.
I would like these values to populate the new input form that right now gets emptied out on a succesful save.
#Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.PWS, new { #autofocus = "autofocus", #style="width:50px", #maxlength="5" })
Controller ActionResult
First time through:
[HttpGet]
public ActionResult AddColiform(string sortorder)
{
int batchid;
batchid = Convert.ToInt32(Session["ThisBatch"]);
//Session["ThisBatch"] = batchid;
ViewBag.Methods = FillMethods();
ViewBag.Latest = (from m in _db.BactiBucket
where m.Batch_ID == batchid
select m).ToList();
ViewBag.ThisBatch = batchid;
return View(new BactiBucket());
}
When Save button clicked:
[AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)]
public ActionResult AddColiform(BactiBucket bucket)
{
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
//FIRST RECORD SAVED FOR USER CREATES BATCH, OTHERWISE BATCH IS ZERO
if (Session["ThisBatch"].Equals(0))
{
var newbatchid = CheckAndMakeBatchIfNone();
Session["ThisBatch"] = newbatchid;
bucket.Batch_ID = newbatchid;
}
_db.AddToBactiBucket(bucket);
_db.SaveChanges();
return RedirectToAction("AddColiform");
}
ViewBag.Methods = FillMethods();
int batchid;
batchid = Convert.ToInt32(Session["ThisBatch"]);
ViewBag.ThisBatch = batchid;
ViewBag.Latest = (from m in _db.BactiBucket
where m.Batch_ID == batchid
select m).ToList();
return View(bucket);
}
You can pass additional parameters to your GET method in the redirect, and use ths values to set the properties of your model (note its not clear why your method has a parameter string sortorder when you never use it)
[HttpGet]
public ActionResult AddColiform(string sortorder, string PWS, string LabID)
{
....
BactiBucket model = new BactiBucket() { PWS = PWS, LabID = LabID };
return View(model);
}
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult AddColiform(BactiBucket bucket)
{
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
....
return RedirectToAction("AddColiform", new { PWS = bucket.PWS, LabID = bucket.LabID });
}
....
}
Ok, if it was a snake it would have bit me.
In the declaration of the ActionResult I pass the values of the textboxes to the controller. It comes in with the Post action. (PWS and LabID are the names of the inputs).
[AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)]
public ActionResult AddColiform(BactiBucket bucket, string PWS, string LabID)
Then right before the return RedirectToAction("AddColiform");
I set Session variables for each value:
Session["PWS"]=PWS;
Session["LabID"]=LabID;
of course I might use ViewBag.PWS and ViewBag.LabID
Then, when returning and building the new Add Record form,
I populate the #Value of each textbox respectfully:
#Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.PWS, new {#Value=Session["PWS"], #autofocus = "autofocus", #style="width:50px", #maxlength="5" })
#Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.LabID, new {#Value=Session["LabID"], #style="width:150px", #maxlength="20" })
Since I haven't run this code I know I will have to check if Session objects aren't null. Or ViewBag objects. Or set them to "" first time through.
I got this from this forum thread

NHibernate Dynamic Component Default Value Issue

All of my entities (that are mapped to a database table) inherit from an entity class with a dynamic component on it called Attributes e.g.:
public abstract class Entity<T> {
public virtual T Id { get; set; }
private IDictionary _attributes;
public virtual IDictionary Attributes {
get { return _attributes ?? (_attributes = new Hashtable()); }
set { _attributes = value; }
}
}
The Attributes collection allows me to add extra fields to each entity without directly changing the entity itself. This allows me to make my application more modular.
For example say I have the following entity:
public class User : Entity<int> {
public virtual string Name { get; set; }
}
Now say I have a Forum module which needs a NumPosts property against the User. I would add the field against the Users table in the database. This field is non nullable and has a default value of 0. I then map the field using the dynamic component against the User entity.
However when I try inserting the user by saying:
session.Save(new User() { Name = "Test" });
It throws an error as it's expecting me to set a value for NumPosts and the generated SQL would be something like:
INSERT INTO Users (Name, NumPosts) VALUES ('Test', NULL)
However NumPosts does not allow nulls and hence the error. Ideally I'd like it to say the following if the Attributes collection does not contain an entry for NumPosts:
INSERT INTO Users (Name) VALUES ('Test')
An alternative is to say the following which would work fine:
session.Save(new User() { Name = "Test", Attributes = new Hashtable() { { "NumPosts", 0 } } });
The problem I have is that I don't want the modules to have a dependency on each other and I can't really say this.
For reference here's a bare bones version of session factory method which maps the NumPosts field:
return Fluently.Configure()
...
.ExposeConfiguration(c => {
// Get the persistent class
var persistentClass = c.GetClassMapping("User");
// Create the attributes component
var component = new Component(persistentClass);
// Create a simple value
var simpleValue = new SimpleValue(persistentClass.Table);
// Set the type name
simpleValue.TypeName = "Int32";
// Create a new db column specification
var column = new Column("NumPosts");
column.Value = simpleValue;
column.Length = 10;
column.IsNullable = false;
column.DefaultValue = "0";
// Add the column to the value
simpleValue.AddColumn(column);
// Ad the value to the component
component.AddProperty(new Property() { Name = column.Name, Value = simpleValue });
// Add the component property
persistentClass.AddProperty(new Property() { Name = "Attributes", Value = component });
})
.BuildConfiguration();
I'd appreciate if someone could let me know if this is possible. Thanks
You know how to make it working as described above:
... An alternative is to say the following which would work fine:
session.Save(new User()
{
Name = "Test", Attributes = new Hashtable() { { "NumPosts", 0 } }
});
... The problem I have is that I don't want the modules to have a dependency on each other and I can't really say this...
In case, that the biggest issue is the explicit Attributes initialization ("...I don't want the modules to have a dependency...") we can use:
12.2. Event system
So, with Listener like this:
[Serializable]
public class MyPersistListener : NHibernate.Event.ISaveOrUpdateEventListener
{
public void OnSaveOrUpdate(SaveOrUpdateEvent #event)
{
var entity = #event.Entity as Entity<int>; // some interface IHaveAttributes
if (entity == null) // would be more appropriate
{
return;
}
var numPosts = entity.Attributes["NumPosts"] as int?;
if (numPosts.HasValue)
{
return;
}
entity.Attributes["NumPosts"] = 0;
}
}
Based on this doc snippet:
Configuration cfg = new Configuration();
ILoadEventListener[] stack = new ILoadEventListener[] { new MyLoadListener(), new DefaultLoadEventListener() };
cfg.EventListeners.LoadEventListeners = stack;
This should be the init in our case:
.ExposeConfiguration(c => {
var stack = new ISaveOrUpdateEventListener [] { new MyPersistListener() };
c.EventListeners.SaveEventListeners= stack;

Web API Help pages - customizing Property documentation

I have my web api and I added the web api help pages to auto-generate my documentation. It's working great for methods where my parameters are listed out, but I have a method like this:
public SessionResult PostLogin(CreateSessionCommand request)
And, on my help page, it is only listing the command parameter in the properties section. However, in the sample request section, it lists out all of the properties of my CreateSessionCommand class.
Parameters
Name | Description | Additional information
request | No documentation available. | Define this parameter in the request body.
I would like it instead to list all of the properties in my CreateSessionCommand class. Is there an easy way to do this?
So, I managed to devise a workaround for this problem, in case anyone is interested.
In HelpPageConfigurationExtensions.cs I added the following extension method:
public static void AlterApiDescription(this ApiDescription apiDescription, HttpConfiguration config)
{
var docProvider = config.Services.GetDocumentationProvider();
var addParams = new List<ApiParameterDescription>();
var removeParams = new List<ApiParameterDescription>();
foreach (var param in apiDescription.ParameterDescriptions)
{
var type = param.ParameterDescriptor.ParameterType;
//string is some special case that is not a primitive type
//also, compare by full name because the type returned does not seem to match the types generated by typeof
bool isPrimitive = type.IsPrimitive || String.Compare(type.FullName, typeof(string).FullName) == 0;
if (!isPrimitive)
{
var properties = from p in param.ParameterDescriptor.ParameterType.GetProperties()
let s = p.SetMethod
where s.IsPublic
select p;
foreach (var property in properties)
{
var documentation = docProvider.GetDocumentation(new System.Web.Http.Controllers.ReflectedHttpParameterDescriptor()
{
ActionDescriptor = param.ParameterDescriptor.ActionDescriptor,
ParameterInfo = new CustomParameterInfo(property)
});
addParams.Add(new ApiParameterDescription()
{
Documentation = documentation,
Name = property.Name,
Source = ApiParameterSource.FromBody,
ParameterDescriptor = param.ParameterDescriptor
});
}
//since this is a complex type, select it to be removed from the api description
removeParams.Add(param);
}
}
//add in our new items
foreach (var item in addParams)
{
apiDescription.ParameterDescriptions.Add(item);
}
//remove the complex types
foreach (var item in removeParams)
{
apiDescription.ParameterDescriptions.Remove(item);
}
}
And here is the Parameter info instanced class I use
internal class CustomParameterInfo : ParameterInfo
{
public CustomParameterInfo(PropertyInfo prop)
{
base.NameImpl = prop.Name;
}
}
Then, we call the extension in another method inside the extensions class
public static HelpPageApiModel GetHelpPageApiModel(this HttpConfiguration config, string apiDescriptionId)
{
object model;
string modelId = ApiModelPrefix + apiDescriptionId;
if (!config.Properties.TryGetValue(modelId, out model))
{
Collection<ApiDescription> apiDescriptions = config.Services.GetApiExplorer().ApiDescriptions;
ApiDescription apiDescription = apiDescriptions.FirstOrDefault(api => String.Equals(api.GetFriendlyId(), apiDescriptionId, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase));
if (apiDescription != null)
{
apiDescription.AlterApiDescription(config);
HelpPageSampleGenerator sampleGenerator = config.GetHelpPageSampleGenerator();
model = GenerateApiModel(apiDescription, sampleGenerator);
config.Properties.TryAdd(modelId, model);
}
}
return (HelpPageApiModel)model;
}
The comments that are used for this must be added to the controller method and not the properties of the class object. This might be because my object is part of an outside library
this should go as an addition to #Josh answer. If you want not only to list properties from the model class, but also include documentation for each property, Areas/HelpPage/XmlDocumentationProvider.cs file should be modified as follows:
public virtual string GetDocumentation(HttpParameterDescriptor parameterDescriptor)
{
ReflectedHttpParameterDescriptor reflectedParameterDescriptor = parameterDescriptor as ReflectedHttpParameterDescriptor;
if (reflectedParameterDescriptor != null)
{
if (reflectedParameterDescriptor.ParameterInfo is CustomParameterInfo)
{
const string PropertyExpression = "/doc/members/member[#name='P:{0}']";
var pi = (CustomParameterInfo) reflectedParameterDescriptor.ParameterInfo;
string selectExpression = String.Format(CultureInfo.InvariantCulture, PropertyExpression, pi.Prop.DeclaringType.FullName + "." + pi.Prop.Name);
XPathNavigator methodNode = _documentNavigator.SelectSingleNode(selectExpression);
if (methodNode != null)
{
return methodNode.Value.Trim();
}
}
else
{
XPathNavigator methodNode = GetMethodNode(reflectedParameterDescriptor.ActionDescriptor);
if (methodNode != null)
{
string parameterName = reflectedParameterDescriptor.ParameterInfo.Name;
XPathNavigator parameterNode = methodNode.SelectSingleNode(String.Format(CultureInfo.InvariantCulture, ParameterExpression, parameterName));
if (parameterNode != null)
{
return parameterNode.Value.Trim();
}
}
}
}
return null;
}
and CustomParameterInfo class should keep property info as well:
internal class CustomParameterInfo : ParameterInfo
{
public PropertyInfo Prop { get; private set; }
public CustomParameterInfo(PropertyInfo prop)
{
Prop = prop;
base.NameImpl = prop.Name;
}
}
This is currently not supported out of the box. Following bug is kind of related to that:
http://aspnetwebstack.codeplex.com/workitem/877

Data member default values, how to figure out whether something was really sent?

By default, WCF deserializes missing elements into default values like null, 0 or false. The problem with this approach is that if it's a basic type like number 0 I'm not sure whether it means the real value sent by an external system or a default value generated by WCF.
So my question is: Is it possible to find out at run-time whether the default value means "I didn't send anything".
This is crucial because we can't update and overwrite existing data in the database with the default values just because the external system didn't send a particular element this time (data corruption).
Microsoft's short answer is "It is up to the receiving endpoint to appropriately interpret a missing element."
Data member default values
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa347792.aspx
Can somebody please clarify what's that supposed to mean?
Thanks
If you define your data members as properties, you can use whether the setter was called or not to decide whether some value was sent. The code below shows one data contract which knows whether it deserialized its fields.
public class Post_51ca1ead_2f0a_4912_a451_374daab0101b
{
[DataContract(Name = "Person", Namespace = "")]
public class Person
{
string name;
int age;
bool nameWasSent;
bool ageWasSent;
[DataMember]
public string Name
{
get
{
return this.name;
}
set
{
this.nameWasSent = true;
this.name = value;
}
}
[DataMember]
public int Age
{
get
{
return this.age;
}
set
{
this.ageWasSent = true;
this.age = value;
}
}
[OnDeserializing]
void OnDeserializing(StreamingContext ctx)
{
this.ageWasSent = false;
this.nameWasSent = false;
}
public override string ToString()
{
return string.Format("Person[Name={0},Age={1}]",
nameWasSent ? name : "UNSPECIFIED",
ageWasSent ? age.ToString() : "UNSPECIFIED");
}
}
public static void Test()
{
MemoryStream ms = new MemoryStream();
DataContractSerializer dcs = new DataContractSerializer(typeof(Person));
dcs.WriteObject(ms, new Person { Name = "John", Age = 30 });
Console.WriteLine(Encoding.UTF8.GetString(ms.ToArray()));
string noAge = "<Person><Name>John</Name></Person>";
ms = new MemoryStream(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(noAge));
object p = dcs.ReadObject(ms);
Console.WriteLine("No age: {0}", p);
string noName = "<Person><Age>45</Age></Person>";
ms = new MemoryStream(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(noName));
p = dcs.ReadObject(ms);
Console.WriteLine("No name: {0}", p);
}
}

How to update only one field using Entity Framework?

Here's the table
Users
UserId
UserName
Password
EmailAddress
and the code..
public void ChangePassword(int userId, string password){
//code to update the password..
}
Ladislav's answer updated to use DbContext (introduced in EF 4.1):
public void ChangePassword(int userId, string password)
{
var user = new User() { Id = userId, Password = password };
using (var db = new MyEfContextName())
{
db.Users.Attach(user);
db.Entry(user).Property(x => x.Password).IsModified = true;
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
You can tell entity-framework which properties have to be updated in this way:
public void ChangePassword(int userId, string password)
{
var user = new User { Id = userId, Password = password };
using (var context = new ObjectContext(ConnectionString))
{
var users = context.CreateObjectSet<User>();
users.Attach(user);
context.ObjectStateManager.GetObjectStateEntry(user)
.SetModifiedProperty("Password");
context.SaveChanges();
}
}
In Entity Framework Core, Attach returns the entry, so all you need is:
var user = new User { Id = userId, Password = password };
db.Users.Attach(user).Property(x => x.Password).IsModified = true;
db.SaveChanges();
You have basically two options:
go the EF way all the way, in that case, you would
load the object based on the userId provided - the entire object gets loaded
update the password field
save the object back using the context's .SaveChanges() method
In this case, it's up to EF how to handle this in detail. I just tested this, and in the case I only change a single field of an object, what EF creates is pretty much what you'd create manually, too - something like:
`UPDATE dbo.Users SET Password = #Password WHERE UserId = #UserId`
So EF is smart enough to figure out what columns have indeed changed, and it will create a T-SQL statement to handle just those updates that are in fact necessary.
you define a stored procedure that does exactly what you need, in T-SQL code (just update the Password column for the given UserId and nothing else - basically executes UPDATE dbo.Users SET Password = #Password WHERE UserId = #UserId) and you create a function import for that stored procedure in your EF model and you call this function instead of doing the steps outlined above
i'm using this:
entity:
public class Thing
{
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Info { get; set; }
public string OtherStuff { get; set; }
}
dbcontext:
public class MyDataContext : DbContext
{
public DbSet<Thing > Things { get; set; }
}
accessor code:
MyDataContext ctx = new MyDataContext();
// FIRST create a blank object
Thing thing = ctx.Things.Create();
// SECOND set the ID
thing.Id = id;
// THIRD attach the thing (id is not marked as modified)
db.Things.Attach(thing);
// FOURTH set the fields you want updated.
thing.OtherStuff = "only want this field updated.";
// FIFTH save that thing
db.SaveChanges();
While searching for a solution to this problem, I found a variation on GONeale's answer through Patrick Desjardins' blog:
public int Update(T entity, Expression<Func<T, object>>[] properties)
{
DatabaseContext.Entry(entity).State = EntityState.Unchanged;
foreach (var property in properties)
{
var propertyName = ExpressionHelper.GetExpressionText(property);
DatabaseContext.Entry(entity).Property(propertyName).IsModified = true;
}
return DatabaseContext.SaveChangesWithoutValidation();
}
"As you can see, it takes as its second parameter an expression of a
function. This will let use this method by specifying in a Lambda
expression which property to update."
...Update(Model, d=>d.Name);
//or
...Update(Model, d=>d.Name, d=>d.SecondProperty, d=>d.AndSoOn);
( A somewhat similar solution is also given here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/5749469/2115384 )
The method I am currently using in my own code, extended to handle also (Linq) Expressions of type ExpressionType.Convert. This was necessary in my case, for example with Guid and other object properties. Those were 'wrapped' in a Convert() and therefore not handled by System.Web.Mvc.ExpressionHelper.GetExpressionText.
public int Update(T entity, Expression<Func<T, object>>[] properties)
{
DbEntityEntry<T> entry = dataContext.Entry(entity);
entry.State = EntityState.Unchanged;
foreach (var property in properties)
{
string propertyName = "";
Expression bodyExpression = property.Body;
if (bodyExpression.NodeType == ExpressionType.Convert && bodyExpression is UnaryExpression)
{
Expression operand = ((UnaryExpression)property.Body).Operand;
propertyName = ((MemberExpression)operand).Member.Name;
}
else
{
propertyName = System.Web.Mvc.ExpressionHelper.GetExpressionText(property);
}
entry.Property(propertyName).IsModified = true;
}
dataContext.Configuration.ValidateOnSaveEnabled = false;
return dataContext.SaveChanges();
}
New EF Core 7 native feature — ExecuteUpdate:
Finally! After a long wait, EF Core 7.0 now has a natively supported way to run UPDATE (and also DELETE) statements while also allowing you to use arbitrary LINQ queries (.Where(u => ...)), without having to first retrieve the relevant entities from the database: The new built-in method called ExecuteUpdate — see "What's new in EF Core 7.0?".
ExecuteUpdate is precisely meant for these kinds of scenarios, it can operate on any IQueryable instance, and lets you update specific columns on any number of rows, while always issuing a single UPDATE statement behind the scenes, making it as efficient as possible.
Usage:
Let's take OP's example — i.e. updating the password column of a specific user:
dbContext.Users
.Where(u => u.Id == someId)
.ExecuteUpdate(b =>
b.SetProperty(u => u.Password, "NewPassword")
);
As you can see, calling ExecuteUpdate requires you to make calls to the SetProperty method, to specify which property to update, and also what new value to assign to it.
EF Core will translate this into the following UPDATE statement:
UPDATE [u]
SET [u].[Password] = "NewPassword"
FROM [Users] AS [u]
WHERE [u].[Id] = someId
Also, ExecuteDelete for deleting rows:
There's also a counterpart to ExecuteUpdate called ExecuteDelete, which, as the name implies, can be used to delete a single or multiple rows at once without having to first fetch them.
Usage:
// Delete users that haven't been active in 2022:
dbContext.Users
.Where(u => u.LastActiveAt.Year < 2022)
.ExecuteDelete();
Similar to ExecuteUpdate, ExecuteDelete will generate DELETE SQL statements behind the scenes — in this case, the following one:
DELETE FROM [u]
FROM [Users] AS [u]
WHERE DATEPART(year, [u].[LastActiveAt]) < 2022
Other notes:
Keep in mind that both ExecuteUpdate and ExecuteDelete are "terminating", meaning that the update/delete operation will take place as soon as you call the method. You're not supposed to call dbContext.SaveChanges() afterwards.
If you're curious about the SetProperty method, and you're confused as to why ExectueUpdate doesn't instead receive a member initialization expression (e.g. .ExecuteUpdate(new User { Email = "..." }), then refer to this comment (and the surrounding ones) on the GitHub issue for this feature.
Furthermore, if you're curious about the rationale behind the naming, and why the prefix Execute was picked (there were also other candidates), refer to this comment, and the preceding (rather long) conversation.
Both methods also have async equivalents, named ExecuteUpdateAsync, and ExecuteDeleteAsync respectively.
In EntityFramework Core 2.x there is no need for Attach:
// get a tracked entity
var entity = context.User.Find(userId);
entity.someProp = someValue;
// other property changes might come here
context.SaveChanges();
Tried this in SQL Server and profiling it:
exec sp_executesql N'SET NOCOUNT ON;
UPDATE [User] SET [someProp] = #p0
WHERE [UserId] = #p1;
SELECT ##ROWCOUNT;
',N'#p1 int,#p0 bit',#p1=1223424,#p0=1
Find ensures that already loaded entities do not trigger a SELECT and also automatically attaches the entity if needed (from the docs):
Finds an entity with the given primary key values. If an entity with the given primary key values is being tracked by the context, then it is returned immediately without making a request to the database. Otherwise, a query is made to the database for an entity with the given primary key values and this entity, if found, is attached to the context and returned. If no entity is found, then null is returned.
I'm late to the game here, but this is how I am doing it, I spent a while hunting for a solution I was satisified with; this produces an UPDATE statement ONLY for the fields that are changed, as you explicitly define what they are through a "white list" concept which is more secure to prevent web form injection anyway.
An excerpt from my ISession data repository:
public bool Update<T>(T item, params string[] changedPropertyNames) where T
: class, new()
{
_context.Set<T>().Attach(item);
foreach (var propertyName in changedPropertyNames)
{
// If we can't find the property, this line wil throw an exception,
//which is good as we want to know about it
_context.Entry(item).Property(propertyName).IsModified = true;
}
return true;
}
This could be wrapped in a try..catch if you so wished, but I personally like my caller to know about the exceptions in this scenario.
It would be called in something like this fashion (for me, this was via an ASP.NET Web API):
if (!session.Update(franchiseViewModel.Franchise, new[]
{
"Name",
"StartDate"
}))
throw new HttpResponseException(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NotFound));
Entity framework tracks your changes on objects that you queried from database via DbContext. For example if you DbContext instance name is dbContext
public void ChangePassword(int userId, string password){
var user = dbContext.Users.FirstOrDefault(u=>u.UserId == userId);
user.password = password;
dbContext.SaveChanges();
}
I know this is an old thread but I was also looking for a similar solution and decided to go with the solution #Doku-so provided. I'm commenting to answer the question asked by #Imran Rizvi , I followed #Doku-so link that shows a similar implementation. #Imran Rizvi's question was that he was getting an error using the provided solution 'Cannot convert Lambda expression to Type 'Expression> [] ' because it is not a delegate type'. I wanted to offer a small modification I made to #Doku-so's solution that fixes this error in case anyone else comes across this post and decides to use #Doku-so's solution.
The issue is the second argument in the Update method,
public int Update(T entity, Expression<Func<T, object>>[] properties).
To call this method using the syntax provided...
Update(Model, d=>d.Name, d=>d.SecondProperty, d=>d.AndSoOn);
You must add the 'params' keyword in front of the second arugment as so.
public int Update(T entity, params Expression<Func<T, object>>[] properties)
or if you don't want to change the method signature then to call the Update method you need to add the 'new' keyword, specify the size of the array, then finally use the collection object initializer syntax for each property to update as seen below.
Update(Model, new Expression<Func<T, object>>[3] { d=>d.Name }, { d=>d.SecondProperty }, { d=>d.AndSoOn });
In #Doku-so's example he is specifying an array of Expressions so you must pass the properties to update in an array, because of the array you must also specify the size of the array. To avoid this you could also change the expression argument to use IEnumerable instead of an array.
Here is my implementation of #Doku-so's solution.
public int Update<TEntity>(LcmsEntities dataContext, DbEntityEntry<TEntity> entityEntry, params Expression<Func<TEntity, object>>[] properties)
where TEntity: class
{
entityEntry.State = System.Data.Entity.EntityState.Unchanged;
properties.ToList()
.ForEach((property) =>
{
var propertyName = string.Empty;
var bodyExpression = property.Body;
if (bodyExpression.NodeType == ExpressionType.Convert
&& bodyExpression is UnaryExpression)
{
Expression operand = ((UnaryExpression)property.Body).Operand;
propertyName = ((MemberExpression)operand).Member.Name;
}
else
{
propertyName = System.Web.Mvc.ExpressionHelper.GetExpressionText(property);
}
entityEntry.Property(propertyName).IsModified = true;
});
dataContext.Configuration.ValidateOnSaveEnabled = false;
return dataContext.SaveChanges();
}
Usage:
this.Update<Contact>(context, context.Entry(modifiedContact), c => c.Active, c => c.ContactTypeId);
#Doku-so provided a cool approach using generic's, I used the concept to solve my issue but you just can't use #Doku-so's solution as is and in both this post and the linked post no one answered the usage error questions.
Combining several suggestions I propose the following:
async Task<bool> UpdateDbEntryAsync<T>(T entity, params Expression<Func<T, object>>[] properties) where T : class
{
try
{
var entry = db.Entry(entity);
db.Set<T>().Attach(entity);
foreach (var property in properties)
entry.Property(property).IsModified = true;
await db.SaveChangesAsync();
return true;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("UpdateDbEntryAsync exception: " + ex.Message);
return false;
}
}
called by
UpdateDbEntryAsync(dbc, d => d.Property1);//, d => d.Property2, d => d.Property3, etc. etc.);
Or by
await UpdateDbEntryAsync(dbc, d => d.Property1);
Or by
bool b = UpdateDbEntryAsync(dbc, d => d.Property1).Result;
I use ValueInjecter nuget to inject Binding Model into database Entity using following:
public async Task<IHttpActionResult> Add(CustomBindingModel model)
{
var entity= await db.MyEntities.FindAsync(model.Id);
if (entity== null) return NotFound();
entity.InjectFrom<NoNullsInjection>(model);
await db.SaveChangesAsync();
return Ok();
}
Notice the usage of custom convention that doesn't update Properties if they're null from server.
ValueInjecter v3+
public class NoNullsInjection : LoopInjection
{
protected override void SetValue(object source, object target, PropertyInfo sp, PropertyInfo tp)
{
if (sp.GetValue(source) == null) return;
base.SetValue(source, target, sp, tp);
}
}
Usage:
target.InjectFrom<NoNullsInjection>(source);
Value Injecter V2
Lookup this answer
Caveat
You won't know whether the property is intentionally cleared to null OR it just didn't have any value it. In other words, the property value can only be replaced with another value but not cleared.
_context.Users.UpdateProperty(p => p.Id, request.UserId, new UpdateWrapper<User>()
{
Expression = p => p.FcmId,Value = request.FcmId
});
await _context.SaveChangesAsync(cancellationToken);
Update Property is an extension method
public static void UpdateProperty<T, T2>(this DbSet<T> set, Expression<Func<T, T2>> idExpression,
T2 idValue,
params UpdateWrapper<T>[] updateValues)
where T : class, new()
{
var entity = new T();
var attach = set.Attach(entity);
attach.Property(idExpression).IsModified = false;
attach.Property(idExpression).OriginalValue = idValue;
foreach (var update in updateValues)
{
attach.Property(update.Expression).IsModified = true;
attach.Property(update.Expression).CurrentValue = update.Value;
}
}
And Update Wrapper is a class
public class UpdateWrapper<T>
{
public Expression<Func<T, object>> Expression { get; set; }
public object Value { get; set; }
}
I was looking for same and finally I found the solution
using (CString conn = new CString())
{
USER user = conn.USERs.Find(CMN.CurrentUser.ID);
user.PASSWORD = txtPass.Text;
conn.SaveChanges();
}
believe me it work for me like a charm.
public async Task<bool> UpdateDbEntryAsync(TEntity entity, params Expression<Func<TEntity, object>>[] properties)
{
try
{
this.Context.Set<TEntity>().Attach(entity);
EntityEntry<TEntity> entry = this.Context.Entry(entity);
entry.State = EntityState.Modified;
foreach (var property in properties)
entry.Property(property).IsModified = true;
await this.Context.SaveChangesAsync();
return true;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
throw ex;
}
}
public void ChangePassword(int userId, string password)
{
var user = new User{ Id = userId, Password = password };
using (var db = new DbContextName())
{
db.Entry(user).State = EntityState.Added;
db.SaveChanges();
}
}