I am getting an error : i am using entity framework, wcf.
Error:cannot implicitly convert type System.linq.iorderedQueryable<xDataModel.Info> to System.Collection.Generic.List<xServiceLibrary.Info>
Below are my code:
WCF Service:
namespace xServiceLibrary
{
public List<Info> GetScenario()
{
xEntities db = new xEntities();
var query = from qinfo in db.Infoes
select qinfo;
//return query.Cast<Info>().ToList(); (not working)
//return query.toList(); (not working)
return query;
}
}
Interface:
namespace xServiceLibrary
{
[OperationContract]
List<Info> GetScenario();
}
Class:
namespace xServiceLibrary
{
[DataContract]
public class Info
{
[DataMember]
public int Scenario_Id;
[DataMember]
public string Scenario_Name { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public string Company_Name { get; set; }
}
}
update:(2)
I have two class library files.
One is xDataModel namespace in which i have created xmodel.edmx file.
second is xServiceLibrary namespace where i am implementing Wcf Service.
i have attached the xDataModel.dll file in my xServiceLibrary so that i could query my EF Model.
i am not able to understand the concept. any help would be appreciated.
The problem is that you have two different types named Info: DataModel.Info and ServiceLibrary.Info - because these are different types you cannot cast one into the other.
If there is no strong reason for both being there I would eliminate one of them. Otherwise as a workaround you could project DataModel.Info to ServiceLibrary.Info by copying the relevant properties one by one:
var results = (from qinfo in db.Infoes
select new ServiceLibrary.Info()
{
Scenario_Id = qinfo.Scenario_Id,
//and so on
}).ToList();
The problem is that you have two different classes, both called Info, both in scope at the time you run your query. This is a very very bad thing, especially if you thought they were the same class.
If DataModel.Info and ServiceLibrary.Info are the same class, you need to figure out why they are both in scope at the same time and fix that.
If they are different classes, you need to be explicit about which one you are trying to return. Assuming that your EF model includes a set of DataModel.Info objects, your options there are:
Return a List<DataModel.Info> which you can get by calling query.ToList()
Return a List<ServiceLibrary.Info> which you can get by copying the fields from your DataModel.Info objects:
var query = from qinfo in db.Info
select new ServiceLibrary.Info
{
Scenario_Id = q.Scenario_Id,
Scenario_Name = q.Scenario_Name
Company_Name = q.Company_Name
};
Return something else, such as your custom DTO object, similar to #2 but with only the specific fields you need (e.g. if ServiceLibrary.Info is a heavy object you don't want to pass around.
In general, though, your problem is centered around the fact that the compiler is interpreting List<Info> as List<ServiceLibrary.Info> and you probably don't want it to.
Related
We have a POST action in our asp.net core application that accepts a dynamic object.
[HttpPost]
public Task<ActionResult> SubmitAsync(dynamic unitOfWork)
We'd like to transform this POST action to a gRPC server and we'd like to continue receiving dynamic objects in the gRPC service. What is the equivalent of C# dynamic definition in gRPC protobuf file definition? Or if that cannot be achieved what's the best way to receive a dynamic object?
That isn't really a thing right now. In protobuf terms, Any is the closest thing, but I have not yet implemented that in protobuf-net (it is on my short term additions list). The legacy "dynamic types" feature in protobuf-net (that sends type metadata) is actively being phased out, with Any being the preferred route since it allows cross-platform usage and doesn't have the same metadata dependencies.
Frankly, though, I'd probably say "just don't do this"; instead, prefer oneof; it isn't likely that you actually mean "anything" - you probably just mean "one of these things that I expect, but I don't know which", and oneof expresses that intent. More: protobuf-net implements inheritance via oneof, so a good option is something like:
[ProtoContract]
[ProtoInclude(1, typeof(FooRequest))]
[ProtoInclude(2, typeof(BarRequest))]
public abstract class RequestBase {}
[ProtoContract]
public class FooRequest {}
[ProtoContract]
public class BarRequest {}
You can pass messages with fields whose type was not known in advance. You can also pass messages with fields that are not typed, such as dynamic objects that can take any scalar values, and collections null values are allowed.
To do so, import the proto file "google/protobuf/struct.proto" and declare the
dynamic type as google.protobuf.Value.
So, first add bellow line at the top of your proto file:
import "google/protobuf/struct.proto";
Here my sample message with two dynamic fields:
message BranchResponse {
google.protobuf.Value BranchId = 1;
google.protobuf.Value BranchLevel = 2;
}
Note that: the generated type in C# is Value and belongs to the Google.Protobuf.WellKnownTypes namespace, which belongs itself to the Google.Protobuf assembly. This type inherits from the IMessage, IMessage, IEquatable, IDeepCloneable, and IBufferMessage interfaces that all belong to the Google.Protobuf assembly, except for IEquatable, which comes from the .NET System.Runtime assembly. To write and read dynamic values, we have a set of methods available that shown bellow: (these are write static functions)
We can fill BranchResponse model like this:
var branch = new BranchResponse();
branch.BranchId = Value.ForNumber(1);
branch.BranchLevel = Value.ForStruct(new Struct
{
Fields = {
["LevelId"] = Value.ForNumber(1),
["LevelName"] = Value.ForString("Gold"),
["IsProfessional"] = Value.ForBool(true)}
});
The read Value type is straightforward. The Value type has a set of properties that exposes its value in the wanted type. (these are read static functions)
At the end, you need to read data from your response model like this:
Here my c# classes that my response model is supposed to bind to them.
public class BranchModel
{
public int BranchId { get; set; }
public LevelModel Level { get; set; }
}
public class LevelModel
{
public int LevelId{ get; set; }
public string LevelName{ get; set; }
public bool IsProfessional { get; set; }
}
Finally:
var branch = new BranchResponse(); // Received filled from a gRPC call
// Read
var branchModel = new BranchModel
{
BranchId = Convert.ToInt32(branch.BranchId.NumberValue),
Level= new LevelModel
{
LevelId = Convert.ToInt32(branchModel.Level.StructValue.
Fields["LevelId"].NumberValue),
LevelName = branchModel.Level.StructValue.
Fields["LevelName"].StringValue,
IsProfessional = branchModel.Level.StructValue.
Fields["IsProfessional"].BoolValue,
}
};
I wanted to know if there is a known pattern or convention for the following scenario:
I have two classes: MAT (name:String, address:String) & MATversion(type:String, version:int)
Now I have a DataGrid (DataTable) which will take a generic List of objects for the column mapping and data filling.
The columns should be name, type, version. (Which are distributed in MAT and MATversion)
So I create a class to make this work. This class will merge the needed properties from each class (MAT, MATversion).
-> MAT_MATversion (name:String, type:String, version:int).
Does there exist a naming convention for such an class like MAT_MATversion? Any pattern that mirrors that?
Thanks!
Is there any specific reason why the merged result has to be a unique class?
I'm assuming every MAT object has a single MATversion
you can add a couple of custom properties who will return the type and version of the underlying MATversion object
In C# this would result in something like this
public class MAT{
public String name{ get;set;};
public String adress{ get;set;};
public MATversion myVersion;
public String type {
get{
return myVersion.type;
}
set{
myVersion.type = value;
}
}
public int version {
get{
return myVersion.version;
}
set{
myVersion.version = value;
}
}
}
I'm aware that this doesn't answer the question about design patterns, but I couldn't ask/suggest another approach in a comment since I don't have that right yet.
I have an object in C# that I want to use as a primary key in a database that auto-increments when new objects are added. The object is basically a wrapper of a ulong value that uses some bits of the value for additional hints. I want to store it as a 'pure' ulong value in a database but I would like get an automatic conversion when the value is loaded / unloaded from DB. IE, apply the 'hint' bits to the value based on the table they come from.
I went on a journey of implementing my own IUserType object based on number of examples I found online ( tons of help on this forum ).
I have an ObjectId class that acts is an object ID
class ObjectIdType: IUserType
{
private static readonly NHibernate.SqlTypes.SqlType[] SQL_TYPES = { NHibernateUtil.UInt64.SqlType };
public NHibernate.SqlTypes.SqlType[] SqlTypes
{
get { return SQL_TYPES; }
}
public Type ReturnedType
{
get { return typeof(ObjectId); }
}
...
}
I have a mapping class that looks like this:
public class ObjectTableMap()
{
Id(x => x.Id)
.Column("instance_id")
.CustomType<ObjectIdType>()
.GeneratedBy.Native();
}
At this point I get an exception at config that Id can only be an integer. I guess that makes sense but I was half expecting that having the custom type implemented, the native ulong database type would take over and work.
I've tried to go down the path of creating a custom generator but its still a bit out of my skill level so I am stumbling though it.
My question is, is it possible for me to accomplish what I am trying to do with the mapping?
I think, it is not possible, because your mapping uses the native generator for the Id. This can only be used for integral types (and GUIDs). You can try to use assigned Ids with your custom type, so you are responsible for assigning the values to your Id property.
There is another alternative: Why not set your information bits on class level, instead depending on your table? Your entities represent the tables, so you should have the same information in your entity classes. Example:
class Entity
{
protected virtual ulong InternalId { get; set; } // Mapped as Id
public virtual ulong Id // This property is not mapped
{
get
{
var retVal = InternalId;
// Flip your hint bits here based on class information
return retVal;
}
}
}
You could also turn InternalId into a public property and make the setter protected.
I am trying to set up EF to work on WCF and keeping the domain class models EF Agnostic.
The code is organized into 3 projects. (I am taking a stab a DDD - I am very new to it but am looking forward t learning more)
Project: QA - Domain Layer. Contains the DataContract models/entities.
References
QA.Data
Project: QA.Data - Data Layer. Contains the context and EDMX (code generation stragtegy = "none")
References
Entity Framework/System.Data.Entity
Project: QA.Repository - Data Access/Repository. Contains the repository classes
References
QA [Domain Layer]
QA.Data [Data Layer]
Entity Frame/System.DataEntity
My understanding is that the domain layer can reference the data layer but the data layer should never reference the domain. The problem that this presents is that my Domain Models/Classes are defined in the Domain layer but the Context which creates and returns them is in the Data layer. In order for my context to know to return a "Widget" object it would need a reference to the Domain layer which defined the "Widget"
My (failed) solution : My solution was to create interfaces for each Domain Model and place them in the data layer. The context would return ... IdbSet ... These interfaces would, in turn, be implemented by the Domain Models, therefore keeping my data layer from directly needing to reference my domain (which causes illegal circular references anyway). The domain models were originally contructed using "ADO.NET DbContext Generator w/WCF Support" T4 templates. This process resulted in the inclusion of the [KnownType(typeof(IWidgetPiece))] at the beginning of of the widget class defin ition. (A Widget has a navigation property ... ICollection ...)
The problem appears when I attempt to access the service, I get the following error
'QA.Data.IWidgetPiece' cannot be added to list of known types since
another type 'System.Object' with the same data contract name
'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema:anyType' is already present. If
there are different collections of a particular type - for example,
List and Test[], they cannot both be added as known types.
Consider specifying only one of these types for addition to the known
types list.
I can change these to the concrete implementations ... [KnownType(typeof(WidgetPiece))] ... but I continue to get this error because the navigation property they are referring to is still returning an IWidgetPiece interface type which it MUST do in order to satify the interface implementation.
I am trying to figure out how to keep things appropriately divided and still have the context returning what it should. the context returning Interfaces still doesn't "sit" right with me for this and other reasons but I cannot think of another way to do this, and even this is presenting the aforementioned issue. HELP!
Some code to hopefully clarify my previous ramblings ...
namespace QA.Data
{
public interface IWidgetPiece
{
String ID { get; set; }
}
public interface IWidget
{
String ID { get; set; }
ICollection<IWidgetPiece> Pieces;
}
public partial class WidgetEntities : DbContext
{
IDbSet<IWidget> Widgets { get; set; }
IDbSet<IWidgetPiece> WidgetPieces { get; set; }
}
}
namespace QA
{
[KnownType(typeof(IWidgetPiece))]
// [KnownType(typeof(WidgetPiece))]
[DataContract(IsReference = true)]
public partial class Widget : QA.Data.IWidget
{
[DataMember]
public String ID { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public virtual ICollection<IWidgetPiece> Pieces { get; set; }
}
[DataContract(IsReference = true)]
public partial class WidgetPiece : QA.Data.IWidgetPiece
{
[DataMember]
public string ID { get; set; }
}
}
namespace QA.Repository
{
public class WidgetRepository
{
public List<Widget> GetWidgetbyID(String sId)
{
WidgetEntities context = new WidgetEntities();
List<IWidget> objs = context.Widgets.Where(b => b.ID == "78").ToList();
List<Widget> widgetList = new List<Widget>();
foreach (var iwidget in widgetList)
widgetList((Widget)iwidget);
return widgetList;
}
}
}
Do you really want / need two separate models i.e. your data access layer model (edmx) and your "real" domain model? The whole point of an ORM framework like EF is so you can map your domain model to your database tables, using mappings between the physical (database) conceptual model.
Since EF4.1, you can construct your domain model and then in your data access layer map that to your database directly using a fluent API. You can also elect to reverse-engineer your POCO domain model from a database if you want to quickly get up an running.
It just seems a bit of unnecessary complexity to create an entire EF class model, only to then have to map it again into another class model (which will most likely be fairly close to the EF-generated one).
I want to extend Linq's DataContext class to implement the ORM. Currently my model looks like this:
public class Trial : DataContext
{
public Trial(string connectionString) : base(connectionString) { }
[Column(DbType = "System.Guid", IsPrimaryKey = true, IsDbGenerated = true, CanBeNull = false)]
public Guid TrialID { get; set; }
//...
}
However when I try to instantiate a new Trial object to insert it into the database I get an error complaining that Trial does not have a constructor that takes 0 arguments. When I try to create such a constructor, VS complains that DataContext does not have a constructor that takes 0 arguments.
Am I missing something here? How do I seperate the data context from the model definition?
(First time using Linq!)
Thanks in advance,
Max.
Your data context that represents the database view should inherit from DataContext. It should expose Tables where T is the entities (rows) that you want to add. Try generating a model from the database using the designer or SQLMetal and take a closer look at the generated code to see what's going on.