I'm trying to specify a unique column for an entity, using the Fluent NHibernate Automapper Override. For my test class of CodeType, I'd like to make the Type property unique. The goal would be for a "new CodeType()" being created with the same type field as a currently saved CodeType to be overlaid on top of the current entity.
I have the following CodeType class:
public class CodeType : SecurableEntity
{
public virtual string Type { get; set; }
public virtual string Description { get; set; }
/// <summary>
/// This is a placeholder constructor for NHibernate.
/// A no-argument constructor must be available for NHibernate to create the object.
/// </summary>
public CodeType() { }
}
I have the following CodeTypeMap Class:
public class CodeTypeMap : IAutoMappingOverride<CodeType>
{
public void Override(AutoMapping<CodeType> mapping)
{
//Doesn't work. Need a way to specify a column as unique.
mapping.Map(m => m.Type).Unique();
}
}
The override is applied to the AutoMap, through the following:
public AutoPersistenceModel Generate()
{
var mappings = AutoMap.AssemblyOf<User>(new AutomappingConfiguration());
mappings.IgnoreBase<Entity>();
mappings.IgnoreBase<SecurableEntity>();
mappings.IgnoreBase(typeof(EntityWithTypedId<>));
mappings.Conventions.Setup(GetConventions());
mappings.UseOverridesFromAssemblyOf<AutoPersistenceModelGenerator>();
mappings.UseOverridesFromAssemblyOf<UserMap>();
mappings.UseOverridesFromAssemblyOf<CodeMap>();
mappings.UseOverridesFromAssemblyOf<CodeTypeMap>();
return mappings;
}
I'd like the following code to update any existing record with "type" equal to "existingType".
SecurableEntityRepository<CodeType> ctr = new SecurableEntityRepository<CodeType>();
CodeType ct = new CodeType();
ct.type = "existingType";
ct = ctr.SaveOrUpdate(ct);
How can I make NHibernate key off of the type field as unique?
Is this possible?
short answer, what you want is something you have to handle in code because there are so many possibilities. Everytime you create a new CodeType you have to check the db if there is already one
SecurableEntityRepository<CodeType> ctr = new SecurableEntityRepository<CodeType>();
CodeType ct = ctr.GetByType("existingType");
if (ct == null)
{
ct = new CodeType { type = "existingType" };
}
ctr.SaveOrUpdate(ct);
or
SecurableEntityRepository<CodeType> ctr = new SecurableEntityRepository<CodeType>();
CodeType ct = ctr.GetByType("existingType");
if (ct != null)
{
ctr.Detach(ct);
ctr.Merge(new CodeType{ type = "existingType" });
}
or
SecurableEntityRepository<CodeType> ctr = new SecurableEntityRepository<CodeType>();
int ctId = ctr.GetIdByType("existingType");
if (ct != 0)
{
ctr.Merge(new CodeType{ Id = ctId, type = "existingType" });
}
and there are some things which can be written differently
public CodeType() { } can be removed or made protected CodeType() { } if not needed for your domain
public AutoPersistenceModel Generate()
{
return AutoMap.AssemblyOf<User>(new AutomappingConfiguration())
.IgnoreBase<Entity>()
.IgnoreBase<SecurableEntity>()
.IgnoreBase(typeof(EntityWithTypedId<>))
.Conventions.Setup(GetConventions())
.UseOverridesFromAssemblyOf<AutoPersistenceModelGenerator>();
}
Related
Using MSSQL with IDENTITY column for IDs,
how can I get entity IDs synchronized with table IDs after calling BulkInsert?
context.BulkInsert(entities);
Neither of both achieves the requested result:
context.BulkSynchronize(entities);
context.BulkMerge(entities);
Assume we have one entity
var newSomething = new Something { Id = 0 };
and the corresponding TSQL table column definition
ID int IDENTITY(1,1)
Entity Framework automatically sets Id after calling SaveChanges()
context.SomethingSet.Add(newSomething);
context.SaveChanges();
Assert.IsTrue(newSomething.Id != 0)
See also How can I get Id of inserted entity in Entity framework?
How does EFPlus provide a way of getting the Id of inserted entities?
Disclaimer: I'm the owner of the project Entity Framework Extensions
The Entity Framework Extensions library should by default already return the ids for inserted entities.
For example, the following code should already work and return ids when using with BulkInsert.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Data.Entity;
using System.Windows.Forms;
namespace Z.EntityFramework.Extensions.Lab
{
public partial class Form_Request_Ids : Form
{
public Form_Request_DateNull()
{
InitializeComponent();
// CLEAR
using (var ctx = new CurrentContext())
{
ctx.EntitySimples.RemoveRange(ctx.EntitySimples);
ctx.SaveChanges();
}
// TEST
using (var ctx = new CurrentContext())
{
var list = new List<EntitySimple>();
list.Add(new EntitySimple() { Id = 0, IntColumn = 1, CreatedDate = DateTime.Now });
ctx.BulkInsert(list);
}
}
public class CurrentContext : DbContext
{
public CurrentContext()
: base("CodeFirstEntities")
{
}
public DbSet<EntitySimple> EntitySimples { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Types().Configure(x => x.ToTable(GetType().DeclaringType != null ? GetType().DeclaringType.FullName.Replace(".", "_") + "_" + x.ClrType.Name : ""));
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
}
public class EntitySimple
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int IntColumn { get; set; }
public DateTime CreatedDate { get; set; }
}
}
}
If you still have the issue, try to contact us directly with an example info#zzzprojects.com or post your example here.
When I save a document that has a generic type DataView<Customer>, I'm manually setting the collection name to "customers". However, I'm having some trouble making an index using AbstractIndexCreationTask with a non-default collection name. Here's my index:
public class customers_Search
: AbstractIndexCreationTask<DataView<Customer>, customers_Search.Result>
{
public class Result
{
public string Query { get; set; }
}
public customers_Search()
{
Map = customers =>
from customer in customers
where customer.Data != null
select new
{
Query = AsDocument(customer.Data).Select(x => x.Value)
};
Index(x => x.Query, FieldIndexing.Analyzed);
}
}
When this gets deployed, it looks like this:
from customer in docs.DataViewOfCustomer
where customer.Data != null
select new {
Query = customer.Data.Select(x => x.Value)
}
This doesn't work obviously, and if I change DataViewOfCustomer to "customers" it works just fine.
I'd rather not have to use non-type-checked (string) indexes to deploy. Is there a way to set the collection name that from the AbstractIndexCreationTask class?
Update
Since my data class is generic, I made a generic index which fixes up the names.
public class DataViewQuery<TEntity>
: AbstractIndexCreationTask<DataView<TEntity>, DataViewQueryResult>
{
private readonly string _entityName;
private readonly string _indexName;
// this is to fix the collection name for the index name
public override string IndexName { get { return _indexName; } }
// this is to fix the collection name for the index query
public override void Execute(IDatabaseCommands databaseCommands, DocumentConvention documentConvention)
{
var conventions = documentConvention.Clone();
conventions.FindTypeTagName =
type =>
typeof(DataView<TEntity>) == type
? _entityName
: documentConvention.FindTypeTagName(type);
base.Execute(databaseCommands, conventions);
}
public DataViewQuery(string entityName)
{
_entityName = entityName;
_indexName = String.Format("{0}/{1}", entityName, "Query");
Map = items =>
from item in items
where item.Data != null
select new
{
Query = AsDocument(item.Data).Select(x => x.Value)
};
Index(x => x.Query, FieldIndexing.Analyzed);
}
}
public class DataViewQueryResult
{
public string Query { get; set; }
}
Then I can create a specific index which has all the configuration in it.
// sets the collection type (DataView<Customer>) for the index
public class CustomerQuery : DataViewQuery<Customer>
{
// sets the collection name for the index
public CustomerQuery() : base(EntityName.Customers) { }
}
You need to configure this in the conventions.
The property to configure is FindTypeTagName
I have 2 classes, Member.cs and Customer.cs and using table-per-type inheritance mapping described here.
This question poses the same problem, but with no answer.
Customer.cs
public class Customer
{
}
Member.cs
public class Member : Customer
{
public Member(Customer customer)
{
CreateFromCustomer(customer);
}
private void CreateFromCustomer(Customer customer)
{
// Here I assume I'll assign the Id so NHibernate wouldn't have to create a new Customer and know what Customer to be referred
Id = customer.Id;
}
}
CustomerMap.cs
public class CustomerMap : ClassMap<Customer>
{
public CustomerMap()
{
Id(x => x.Id)
.GeneratedBy.GuidComb();
}
}
MemberMap.cs
public class MemberMap : SubclassMap<Member>
{
public MemberMap()
{
KeyColumn("Id");
}
}
I tried several test case :
Test1.cs
[Test]
public void CanAddCustomer()
{
var customerRepo = /* blablabla */;
using (var tx = NHibernateSessionManager.GetSession().BeginTransaction())
{
var customer = new Customer()
customerRepo.RegisterCustomer(customer);
tx.Commit();
}
using (var tx = NHibernateSessionManager.GetSession().BeginTransaction())
{
/* Get the persisted customer */
var customer = customerRepo.GetCustomerByWhatever();
var member = customerRepo.RegisterMember(new Member(customer));
tx.Commit();
}
}
I'm expecting to have :
1 customer and 1 member which is a child of that customer
Instead I have :
2 customers (1 that is what was correctly created and 1 with all null columns) and 1 member that Id referred to all null columns Customer.
Is it the expected behavior?
I understand if we were wanted to create a child object from a transient parent object, this is a correct behavior.
But what if we were to create a child object that refers to an existing parent object?
The link I provided doesn't cover any persistence example, neither does googling.
Short Answer
No, it is not possible to "upgrade" an already persisted object to its subclass. Nhibernate simply doesn't support this. That's why you see 2 customers and one member entry. This is actually the expected behavior because Nhibernate simply creates a copy with a new ID of the object instead of creating the reference to Member...
So basically you could do either
Copy the data of Customer into Member, delete customer and save Member
Use a different object structure without subclasses where Member is a different table with it's own ID and a reference to Customer
Use native sql to insert the row into Member...
Some example:
Your classes could look like this
public class Customer
{
public virtual Guid Id { get; set; }
public virtual string Name { get; set; }
}
public class Member : Customer
{
public virtual string MemberSpecificProperty { get; set; }
}
Basically, Member could have additional properties, but will have the same properties as Customer of cause, too.
public class CustomerMap : ClassMap<Customer>
{
public CustomerMap()
{
Id(x => x.Id)
.GeneratedBy.GuidComb();
Map(x => x.Name);
}
}
and for the sub class, you have to map additional properties only!
public class MemberMap : SubclassMap<Member>
{
public MemberMap()
{
Map(x => x.MemberSpecificProperty);
}
}
testing it
{
session.Save(new Customer()
{
Name ="Customer A"
});
session.Save(new Member()
{
Name = "Customer B",
MemberSpecificProperty = "something else"
});
session.Flush();
}
This will create 2 entries in the customer table and one row into Member table. So this is as expected, because we created one customer and one member...
Now the "upgrade" from Customer A to Member:
using (var session = NHibernateSessionFactory.Current.OpenSession())
{
session.Save(new Customer()
{
Name ="Customer A"
});
session.Flush();
}
using (var session = NHibernateSessionFactory.Current.OpenSession())
{
var customer = session.Query<Customer>().FirstOrDefault();
//var member = customer as Member;
var member = new Member()
{
Name = customer.Name,
MemberSpecificProperty = "something else"
};
session.Delete(customer);
session.Save(member);
session.Flush();
}
I'm working on an MVC 4 project and trying to convert a value in a KeyValue list to a nullable DateTime. I have used the following line in the mapper (I've not included the other properties as there are a lot)
.ForMember(d => d.Deadline, m => m.ResolveUsing<DeadlineResolver>())
My resolver looks like this:
public class DeadlineResolver : ValueResolver<Booking, DateTime?>
{
protected override DateTime? ResolveCore(Booking source, ResolutionResult resolutionResult)
{
KeyValue keyValue = source.KeyValues.FirstOrDefault(k => k.Key.KeyId == "DEADLINE");
return (keyValue != null) ? DateTime.Parse(keyValue.Value) : (DateTime?)null;
}
}
The value of deadline which is defined as shown below is never returned as null but DateTime.MinDate instead. I need it to be null when I'm the binding the result in a view so that I only show a value when there is a date.
public DateTime? Deadline { get; set; }
How do I make these values null without going over the values after mapping to look for min dates and set to null (temp hack I've put in place so the code runs)?
Using LinqPad and AutoMapper 2.2.1 the following gives me a valid date when KeyValue has a date, and a null DateTime when KeyValue is null. (Note there are minor changes to the resolver to simplify it as the class definitions weren't provided).
void Main()
{
AutoMapper.Mapper.CreateMap<Booking, dest>()
.ForMember(d => d.Deadline, m => m.ResolveUsing<DeadlineResolver>());
AutoMapper.Mapper.AssertConfigurationIsValid();
// Gives a valid DateTime
var booking = new Booking { KeyValue = "2013-01-01" };
booking.Dump();
var rc = AutoMapper.Mapper.Map<Booking, dest>(booking);
rc.Dump();
// Gives a null DateTime
booking = new Booking { KeyValue = null };
booking.Dump();
rc = AutoMapper.Mapper.Map<Booking, dest>(booking);
rc.Dump();
}
// Define other methods and classes here
public class Booking
{
public string KeyValue { get; set; }
}
public class dest
{
public DateTime? Deadline { get; set; }
}
public class DeadlineResolver : AutoMapper.ValueResolver<Booking, DateTime?>
{
protected override DateTime? ResolveCore(Booking source)
{
return (source.KeyValue != null)
? DateTime.Parse(source.KeyValue)
: (DateTime?)null;
}
}
Is this the functionality you were after? If so, then the issue could be with an older version of AutoMapper, or an unexpected KeyValue value.
I am trying to map same column to be an attribute and a relationship (for reasons that have to do with legacy data) using following mapping:
References(x => x.BaseProductTemplate, "ProductCodeTxt");
Map(x => x.DescriptionCode, "ProductCodeTxt")
.CustomType(typeof(TrimmedStringUserType));
but "System.IndexOutOfRangeException: Invalid index 9 for this SqlParameterCollection with Count=9." exception is thrown. How can I achieve this with NH without getting this error.
Here is a class:
public static MarketingPlanBaseProduct Create(BaseProductTemplate baseProductTemplate, ProductType productType)
{
var toReturn = new MarketingPlanBaseProduct();
toReturn.BaseProductTemplate = baseProductTemplate;
toReturn.Type = productType;
return toReturn;
}
protected MarketingPlanBaseProduct()
{
_coInsurancePercentages = new List<PlanCoInsurance>();
_benefits = new List<BaseProductBenefit>();
}
#region " Old system workaround "
/// HACK: In insight users were able to override description and the code, and system was displaying description from
/// the "BaseProduct" table, not from "ProductRef" table. In order to have this description display in Insight
/// during transitional period
/// we are modeling the MarketingPlanBaseProduct with two independent properties
/// that will be loaded based on the values in "ProductCodeTxt" and ProductNameTxt.
/// New MarketingPlanBaseProducts will however have description populated based on BaseProductTemplate ("ProductRef")
/// and code/description will not be changable from New System
/// Once old system is cut off, "DescriptionCode" Property should be removed,
/// "Name should be changed to be mapped property that derives value from BaseProductTemplate relationship
private string _descriptionCode;
public virtual string DescriptionCode
{
get
{
return _descriptionCode;
}
}
private string _name;
public virtual string Name
{
get { return _name; }
}
private void SetName(BaseProductTemplate baseProductTemplate)
{
_name = baseProductTemplate.Name;
_descriptionCode = baseProductTemplate.Code;
}
private BaseProductTemplate _baseProductTemplate;
public virtual BaseProductTemplate BaseProductTemplate
{
get
{
return _baseProductTemplate;
}
private set
{
_baseProductTemplate = value;
SetName(_baseProductTemplate);
}
}
You can also use Formula:
Map(x => x.MyProperty).Formula("propertyColumn").Not.Insert().Not.Update();
Since this was mapped on the view, I added one more column in the view with different name mapped to the same column, and it works.