I'm a beginner in NHibernate. I have to write a complex query on say an "Employee" to populate all the associations for Employee based on the where clause. What I'm looking for is similar to this - when you do a Employee.FindById(10) should fill up OwnedDepartment, SubscribedGroups etc.
The Employee model I need to populate is really heavy (many associations with other objects)
but I need to populate only few associations. How do I achieve it using a query over? or any other approaches?
Updated
I was reading about eager loading just now, has it something to do with the loading ? In my map I have not mentioned any loading techniques, so by default all of my employee's child element are getting loaded already. There is a bunch of queries getting triggered underneath.
All the associations are lazy loaded by default. That means that the load is triggered when you access it - that's why so many queries are issued. If you want to eagerly load the data (which means either joining the tables or - rarely - doing additional select queries at once), you have to specify it in your mapping or query, depending how you fetch your data. The concept is generally called "eager fetching".
If you want to get a single Employee by ID, the standard way to do it is using session.Get<Employee>(10) - but that approach means that eager loads need to be specified in the mapping. For mapping by code it will be c.Lazy(CollectionLazy.NoLazy); for collections or c.Lazy(LazyRelation.NoProxy) for many-to-one - see here or here for details.
I prefer specifying that kind of things in the query - just where it is used, not globally for the whole entity, regardless who is fetching and what for. In LINQ provider you have FetchMany(x => x.SubscribedGroups) for collections and Fetch(x => x.OwnedDepartment) for many-to-one relations. You can find similiar options in QueryOver, if that's your choice.
Related
I'm relatively new to using NHibernate and I'm running into a shortcoming I can't seem to work myself around. I have an object tree that I wish to retrieve from the database in a single roundtrip but end up with a cartesian product.
The objects I'm trying to retrieve are called 'AccountGroup', 'Concern', 'Advertiser' and 'Product' and I only wish to get those objects where the active user has permissions for.
My initial query looked like this:
using (var session = OpenSession())
{
return session.Query<AccountGroupEntity>()
.FetchMany(a => a.Planners)
.Where(a => a.Planners.Any(p => p.Id == userId))
.FetchMany(a => a.Concerns)
.ThenFetchMany(c => c.Advertisers)
.ThenFetch(a => a.Products)
.ToList();
}
This won't work as it will return a cartesian product and the resulting entities will contain many duplicates.
However, I have NO idea how to fix this. I've seen the ToFuture() method that will allow me to execute more than one query in the same roundtrip, but I have no clue how to configure my ToFuture() query in such a way that it populates all the child collections properly.
Could anyone shine some light on how I can use ToFuture to fetch the entire tree in a single query without duplicates?
I do have an answer to this topic, solution which I do use. But it at the end means "do not use Fetch" - do it differently. So, please, take it at least as a suggestion.
Check this Q & A:
How to Eager Load Associations without duplication in NHibernate?
Small cite:
Fetching Collections is a difficult operation. It has many side effects (as you realized, when there are fetched more collections). But even with fetching one collection, we are loading many duplicated rows.
Other words, Fetching is a fragil feature, and should be used wisely in very few scenarios, I'd say. So what to use? How to solve that?
Profit from a built in NHibernate feature:
19.1.5. Using batch fetching
NHibernate can make efficient use of batch fetching, that is, NHibernate can load several uninitialized proxies if one proxy is accessed (or collections. Batch fetching is an optimization of the lazy select fetching strategy. There are two ways you can tune batch fetching: on the class and the collection level.
Batch fetching for classes/entities is easier to understand. Imagine you have the following situation at runtime: You have 25 Cat instances loaded in an ISession, each Cat has a reference to its Owner, a Person. The Person class is mapped with a proxy, lazy="true". If you now iterate through all cats and call cat.Owner on each, NHibernate will by default execute 25 SELECT statements, to retrieve the proxied owners. You can tune this behavior by specifying a batch-size in the mapping of Person:
<class name="Person" batch-size="10">...</class>
NHibernate will now execute only three queries, the pattern is 10, 10, 5.
You may also enable batch fetching of collections. For example, if each Person has a lazy collection of Cats, and 10 persons are currently loaded in the ISesssion, iterating through all persons will generate 10 SELECTs, one for every call to person.Cats. If you enable batch fetching for the Cats collection in the mapping of Person, NHibernate can pre-fetch collections:
<class name="Person">
<set name="Cats" batch-size="3">
...
</set>
My experience, this approach is pricless. The setting working for us is batch-size="25".
If you ask for any kind of Entity (via session.Get() or .QueryOver()...) - until session is open, the first time we touch related reference or collection - it is loaded in few batches... No 1 + N SELECT Issue...
Summary: Mark all your classes, and all collection with batch-size="x" (x could be 25). That will support clean queries over root Entities - until session is open, all related stuff is loaded in few SELECTS. The x could be adjusted, for some could be much more higher...
I tried to do a lot of research but I'm more of a db guy - so even the explanation in the MSDN doesn't make any sense to me. Can anyone please explain, and provide some examples on what Include() statement does in the term of SQL query?
Let's say for instance you want to get a list of all your customers:
var customers = context.Customers.ToList();
And let's assume that each Customer object has a reference to its set of Orders, and that each Order has references to LineItems which may also reference a Product.
As you can see, selecting a top-level object with many related entities could result in a query that needs to pull in data from many sources. As a performance measure, Include() allows you to indicate which related entities should be read from the database as part of the same query.
Using the same example, this might bring in all of the related order headers, but none of the other records:
var customersWithOrderDetail = context.Customers.Include("Orders").ToList();
As a final point since you asked for SQL, the first statement without Include() could generate a simple statement:
SELECT * FROM Customers;
The final statement which calls Include("Orders") may look like this:
SELECT *
FROM Customers JOIN Orders ON Customers.Id = Orders.CustomerId;
I just wanted to add that "Include" is part of eager loading. It is described in Entity Framework 6 tutorial by Microsoft. Here is the link:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/mvc/overview/getting-started/getting-started-with-ef-using-mvc/reading-related-data-with-the-entity-framework-in-an-asp-net-mvc-application
Excerpt from the linked page:
Here are several ways that the Entity Framework can load related data into the navigation properties of an entity:
Lazy loading. When the entity is first read, related data isn't retrieved. However, the first time you attempt to access a navigation property, the data required for that navigation property is automatically retrieved. This results in multiple queries sent to the database — one for the entity itself and one each time that related data for the entity must be retrieved. The DbContext class enables lazy loading by default.
Eager loading. When the entity is read, related data is retrieved along with it. This typically results in a single join query that retrieves all of the data that's needed. You specify eager loading by using the Include method.
Explicit loading. This is similar to lazy loading, except that you explicitly retrieve the related data in code; it doesn't happen automatically when you access a navigation property. You load related data manually by getting the object state manager entry for an entity and calling the Collection.Load method for collections or the Reference.Load method for properties that hold a single entity. (In the following example, if you wanted to load the Administrator navigation property, you'd replace Collection(x => x.Courses) with Reference(x => x.Administrator).) Typically you'd use explicit loading only when you've turned lazy loading off.
Because they don't immediately retrieve the property values, lazy loading and explicit loading are also both known as deferred loading.
Think of it as enforcing Eager-Loading in a scenario where your sub-items would otherwise be lazy-loading.
The Query EF is sending to the database will yield a larger result at first, but on access no follow-up queries will be made when accessing the included items.
On the other hand, without it, EF would execute separte queries later, when you first access the sub-items.
include() method just to include the related entities.
but what happened on sql is based on the relationship between those entities which you are going to include what the data you going to fetch.
your LINQ query decides what type of joins have to use, there could be left outer joins there could be inner join there could be right joins etc...
#Corey Adler
Remember that you should use .Include() and .ThenInclude() only when returning the object (NOT THE QUERYABLE) with the "other table property".
As a result, it should only be used when returning APIs' objects, not in your intra-application.
I have 2 tables ATable and AATable where both have a shared Primary Key - ATable.aKey and AATable.aKey to represent a one-to-one relationship. For my Fluent mapping I have a HasOne Relationship defined within my Fluent ATableMapping, all of which works fine. However I have noticed that querying for ATable generates a 2nd query (N+1) for the child Table AATable. My understanding is that Hasone eager loads by default, and I had assumed this would be part of the query for ATable, but I may well have this wrong?
I have researched various solutions including using .Not.LazyLoad().Fetch.Join(), PropertyRef, ForeignKey but I cannot seem to resolve the n+1 so that either it is Eager loaded with 1 query, or Lazy loaded and I can fetch the child with my queries.
Has anyone had any issues with this or have an example they know to work with no n+1? Grateful for any advice.
You have two options:
Not.LazyLoad() which disables possibility to provide lazy loaded related entity and it would enforce NHB to provide corresponding subselect within original query
Use component mapping so both entities point to the same table. This is better approach as once you decided to fetch both entities together, generated queries hit only one table - not two like within first option. This is definitely better for performance.
I am wondering how can one delete an entity having just its ID and type (as in mapping) using NHibernate 2.1?
If you are using lazy loading, Load only creates a proxy.
session.Delete(session.Load(type, id));
With NH 2.1 you can use HQL. Not sure how it actually looks like, but something like this: note that this is subject to SQL injection - if possible use parametrized queries instead with SetParameter()
session.Delete(string.Format("from {0} where id = {1}", type, id));
Edit:
For Load, you don't need to know the name of the Id column.
If you need to know it, you can get it by the NH metadata:
sessionFactory.GetClassMetadata(type).IdentifierPropertyName
Another edit.
session.Delete() is instantiating the entity
When using session.Delete(), NH loads the entity anyway. At the beginning I didn't like it. Then I realized the advantages. If the entity is part of a complex structure using inheritance, collections or "any"-references, it is actually more efficient.
For instance, if class A and B both inherit from Base, it doesn't try to delete data in table B when the actual entity is of type A. This wouldn't be possible without loading the actual object. This is particularly important when there are many inherited types which also consist of many additional tables each.
The same situation is given when you have a collection of Bases, which happen to be all instances of A. When loading the collection in memory, NH knows that it doesn't need to remove any B-stuff.
If the entity A has a collection of Bs, which contains Cs (and so on), it doesn't try to delete any Cs when the collection of Bs is empty. This is only possible when reading the collection. This is particularly important when C is complex of its own, aggregating even more tables and so on.
The more complex and dynamic the structure is, the more efficient is it to load actual data instead of "blindly" deleting it.
HQL Deletes have pitfalls
HQL deletes to not load data to memory. But HQL-deletes aren't that smart. They basically translate the entity name to the corresponding table name and remove that from the database. Additionally, it deletes some aggregated collection data.
In simple structures, this may work well and efficient. In complex structures, not everything is deleted, leading to constraint violations or "database memory leaks".
Conclusion
I also tried to optimize deletion with NH. I gave up in most of the cases, because NH is still smarter, it "just works" and is usually fast enough. One of the most complex deletion algorithms I wrote is analyzing NH mapping definitions and building delete statements from that. And - no surprise - it is not possible without reading data from the database before deleting. (I just reduced it to only load primary keys.)
I've got a parent and child object. Depending on a value in the parent object changes the table for the child object. So for example if the parent object had a reference "01" then it will look in the following table "Child01" whereas if the reference was "02" then it would look in the table "Child02". All the child tables are the same as in number of columns/names/etc.
My question is that how can I tell Fluent Nhibernate or nhibernate which table to look at as each parent object is unique and can reference a number of different child tables?
I've looked at the IClassConvention in Fluent but this seems to only be called when the session is created rather than each time an object is created.
I found only two methods to do this.
Close and recreate the nhibernate session every time another dynamic table needs to be looked at. On creating the session use IClassConvention to dynamically calculate the name based on user data. I found this very intensive as its a large database and a costly operation to create the session every time.
Use POCO object for these tables with custom data access.
As statichippo stated I could use a basechild object and have multiple child object. Due to the database size and the number of dynamic table this wasn't really a valid option.
Neither of my two solutions I was particularly happy with but the POCO's seemed the best way for my problem.
NHibernate is intended to be an object relational mappers. It sounds like you're doing more of a scripting style and hoping to map your data instead of working in an OOP manner.
It sounds like you have the makings of an class hierarchy though. What it sounds like you're trying to create in your code (and then map accordingly) is a hierarchy of different kinds of children:
BaseChild
--> SmartChild
--> DumbChild
Each child is either smart or dumb, but since they all have a FirstName, LastName, Age, etc, they all are instances of the BaseChild class which defines these. The only differences might be that the SmartChild has an IQ and the DumbChild has a FavoriteFootballTeam (this is just an example, no offense to anyone of course ;).
NHibernate will let you map this sort of relationship in many ways. There could be 1 table that encompasses all classes or (what it sounds like you want in your case), one table per class.
Did I understand the issue/what you're looking for?