I have tried to find an answer to this, but could not find one in google. Probably not searching the correct terms, so thought I would ask here.
The following returns all my contacts, not the ones that equal the adjusterType sent in.
var contacts = from c in session.Linq<Contact>() select c;
contacts.Where(c => c.ContactAdjuster.AdjusterType == adjusterType);
The following does return the expected results. It does return only the contacts that meet the adjusterType. I believe it is my lack of understanding of LINQ.
var contacts = from c in session.Linq<Contact>() select c;
contacts = contacts.Where(c => c.ContactAdjuster.AdjusterType == adjusterType);
Thanks in advance.
the Where clause returns an IEnumerable in your case an IEnumerable. This is the standard LiNQ and C# behavior. Instead of modifying your collection it is returning a new collection based on your where clause.
I suppose NHibernate LiNQ should mimic this.
CatZ is absolutely right, you are not modifying the "contacts" collection/enumerable you are creating a new based on the existing, which is why your second statement works.
But instead of just repeating CatZ statement, here is a little add-on:
You can write this in one statement though
var contacts =
from c in session.Linq<Contact>()
where c.ContactAdjuster.AdjusterType == adjusterType
select c;
Or simply
var contacts = session.Linq<Contact>().Where(c => c.ContactAdjuster.AdjusterType == adjusterType);
Related
I've got a few tables, Deployment, Deployment_Report and Workflow. In the event that the deployment is being reviewed they join together so you can see all details in the report. If a revision is going out, the new workflow doesn't exist yet new workflow is going into place so I'd like the values to return null as the revision doesn't exist yet.
Complications aside, this is a sample of the SQL that I'd like to have run:
DECLARE #WorkflowID int
SET #WorkflowID = 399 -- Set to -1 if new
SELECT *
FROM Deployment d
LEFT JOIN Deployment_Report r
ON d.FSJ_Deployment_ID = r.FSJ_Deployment_ID
AND r.Workflow_ID = #WorkflowID
WHERE d.FSJ_Deployment_ID = 339
The above in SQL works great and returns the full record if viewing an active workflow, or the left side of the record with empty fields for revision details which haven't been supplied in the event that a new report is being generated.
Using various samples around S.O. I've produced some Entity to SQL based on a few multiple on statements but I feel like I'm missing something fundamental to make this work:
int Workflow_ID = 399 // or -1 if new, just like the above example
from d in context.Deployments
join r in context.Deployment_Reports.DefaultIfEmpty()
on
new { d.Deployment_ID, Workflow_ID }
equals
new { r.Deployment_ID, r.Workflow_ID }
where d.FSJ_Deployment_ID == fsj_deployment_id
select new
{
...
}
Is the SQL query above possible to create using LINQ to Entities without employing Entity SQL? This is the first time I've needed to create such a join since it's very confusing to look at but in the report it's the only way to do it right since it should only return one record at all times.
The workflow ID is a value passed in to the call to retrieve the data source so in the outgoing query it would be considered a static value (for lack of better terminology on my part)
First of all don't kill yourself on learning the intricacies of EF as there are a LOT of things to learn about it. Unfortunately our deadlines don't like the learning curve!
Here's examples to learn over time:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb397895.aspx
In the mean time I've found this very nice workaround using EF for this kind of thing:
var query = "SELECT * Deployment d JOIN Deployment_Report r d.FSJ_Deployment_ID = r.Workflow_ID = #WorkflowID d.FSJ_Deployment_ID = 339"
var parm = new SqlParameter(parameterName="WorkFlowID" value = myvalue);
using (var db = new MyEntities()){
db.Database.SqlQuery<MyReturnType>(query, parm.ToArray());
}
All you have to do is create a model for what you want SQL to return and it will fill in all the values you want. The values you are after are all the fields that are returned by the "Select *"...
There's even a really cool way to get EF to help you. First find the table with the most fields, and get EF to generated the model for you. Then you can write another class that inherits from that class adding in the other fields you want. SQL is able to find all fields added regardless of class hierarchy. It makes your job simple.
Warning, make sure your filed names in the class are exactly the same (case sensitive) as those in the database. The goal is to make a super class model that contains all the fields of all the join activity. SQL just knows how to put them into that resultant class giving you strong typing ability and even more important use-ability with LINQ
You can even use dataannotations in the Super Class Model for displaying other names you prefer to the User, this is a super nice way to keep the table field names but show the user something more user friendly.
I want to query a table and only need one cell returned. Right now the only way I can think to do it is:
$query = $this->db->query('SELECT id FROM crops WHERE name = "wheat"');
if ($query->num_rows() > 0) {
$row = $query->row();
$crop_id = $row->id;
}
What I want is, since I'm select 'id' anyway, for that to be the result. IE: $query = 'cropId'.
Any ideas? Is this even possible?
Of course it's possible. Just use AND in your query:
$query = $this->db->query('SELECT id FROM crops WHERE name = "wheat" AND id = {$cropId}');
Or you could use the raw power of the provided Active Record class:
$this->db->select('id');
$this->db->from('crops');
$this->db->where('name','wheat');
$this->db->where('id',$cropId);
$query = $this->db->get();
If you just want the cropId from the whole column:
foreach ($query->result()->id as $cropId)
{
echo $cropId;
}
Try this out, I'm not sure if it will work:
$cropId = $query->first_row()->id;
Note that you want to swap your quotes around: use " for your PHP strings, and ' for your SQL strings. First of all, it would not be compatible with PostgreSQL and other database systems that check such things.
Otherwise, as Christopher told you, you can test the crop identifier in your query. Only if you define a string between '...' in PHP, the variables are not going to be replaced in the strings. So he showed the wrong PHP code.
"SELECT ... $somevar ..."
will work better.
Yet, there is a security issue in writing such strings: it is very dangerous because $somevar could represent some additional SQL and completely transform your SELECT in something that you do not even want to think about. Therefore, the Active Record as mentioned by Christopher is a lot safer.
It's been bugging me, I have a query which returns a single row and I need to get their corresponding column value.
//Retrieve Ticket Information to Database
$r = db_query("SELECT title, description, terms_cond, image, social_status, sched_stat FROM giveaway_table WHERE ticket_id = :ticket_id",
array(
':ticket_id' => $ticket_id
));
There are two ways that I can get data which is, by using fetchColumn() and fetchObject()
fetchObject()
$object = $r->fetchObject();
$ticket_info[] = $object->title;
$ticket_info[] = $object->description;
$ticket_info[] = $object->terms_cond;
$ticket_info[] = $object->image;
$ticket_info[] = $object->social_status;
$ticket_info[] = $object->sched_stat;
fetchColumn()
$title = $r->fetchColumn() //Returns title column value
$description = $r->fetchColumn(1) //Returns description column value
Was wondering, which one is better, or are there any pros and cons about this stuff?
if possible, can you guys also suggest the best way (if there's any) on how to retrieve all columns that's been selected in a query and store it into an array with less line of code.
There are two ways that I can get data which is, by using fetchColumn() and fetchObject()
really? what about fetch()?
There is a PDO tag wiki where you can find everything you need
I don't know pros and cons of using it. In my project I often used fetching as array rather than object. It was more comfortable. But if you make ORM projects then maybe it would be better to use fetchObject and make it your object not a std_class. You could make a contructor that has one parametr which is stdClass and make your object from this class
Answering your other question you can fetch all columns using fetchAll();
Follow this link to learn more about this function http://www.php.net/manual/en/pdostatement.fetchall.php
More about abstract database layer you can find here -> http://www.doctrine-project.org/
I'm somewhat new to Entity Framework (4). I've been tracking down a bug in our software, and I've nailed it down the follow quirk. I'm curious if anyone can help me explain why these two Counts (dataCount and data2Count) would be different depending on the way I've invoked them. data2Count is correct and actually matches up with what I have in SQL.
using (var context = new Entities(ConnectionString))
{
var startDateTime = DateTime.Parse("10/1/2011");
var endDateTime = DateTime.Parse("12/31/2011 23:59");
var query = from data in context.vDATA
where data.ParentId == parentId &&
data.TimeStamp >= startDateTime &&
data.TimeStamp <= endDateTime
select data;
var data = query.ToList();
var dataCount = data.Where(x => x.TestType == 20).Count();
//dataCount is 162
var data2 = query.Where(x => x.TestType == 20);
var data2Count = data2.Count();
//data2Count is 198
}
Thanks.
Alright, I think I found and fixed what was happening - although I'm not sure I can explain internally how EF handles it... I found an article here: Entity framework result discrepancy for a database views that sounded like a similar issue. My data in SQL had several records who's fields were roughly identical. The only distinguishing field was TestType. But it was NOT marked as part of the key. Simply extending the key to include this field caused the Counts to match up correctly.
How is parentId getting set? Is it a variable declared outside of a loop this code fragment is running in? If so, this might be acting funky because of closure issues. This other question gives you a lot of information on how to address the closure issues.
I simply want to include a row number against the returned results of my query.
I found the following post that describes what I am trying to achieve but gives me an exception
http://vaultofthoughts.net/LINQRowNumberColumn.aspx
"An expression tree may not contain an assignment operator"
In MS SQL I would just use the ROWNUMBER() function, I'm simply looking for the equivalent in LINQ.
Use AsEnumerable() to evaluate the final part of your query on the client, and in that final part add a counter column:
int rowNo = 0;
var results = (from data in db.Data
// Add any processing to be performed server side
select data)
.AsEnumerable()
.Select(d => new { Data = d, Count = ++rowNo });
I'm not sure whether LINQ to SQL supports it (but it propably will), but there's an overload to the Queryable.Select method that accepts an lambda with an indexer. You can write your query as follows:
db.Authors.Select((author, index) => new
{
Lp = index, Name = author.Name
});
UPDATE:
I ran a few tests, but unfortunately LINQ to SQL does not support this overload (both 3.5sp1 and 4.0). It throws a NotSupportedException with the message:
Unsupported overload used for query
operator 'Select'.
LINQ to SQL allows you to map a SQL function. While I've not tested this, I think this construct will work:
public partial class YourDataContext : DatContext
{
[Function(Name = "ROWNUMBER")]
public int RowNumber()
{
throw InvalidOperationException("Not called directly.");
}
}
And write a query as follows:
from author in db.Authors
select new { Lp = db.RowNumber(), Name = author.Name };