I am new to ASP.NET MVC. I should create a page where users enters an order for their shops by central warehouse. The products and amounts are listed by a stored procedure from database. I have to show rows in a gridview which are calculated by the stored procedure. I want to insert the changed data in a table in SQL after the user make changes on the gridview. Users can call the saved doc back and make changes on it and save it again.
I can't build a strategy how that can be made. If I use Entity Framework I can show the SQL table rows in grid but it is not my goal. I have to let the SQL calculate first the data. Could you please give me some start point and steps to go ahead. I hope I could explain what I need.
There Are some simple steps to do that
1- Go and update model from database and add the required Stored procedure
2- create a complex type from model browser
in complex type map your Stored procedure fields as it returns the data.
3- and map that complex type to the stored procedure. and use it as you use table.
Related
As an example:
I have two tables in firebird:
TB_CUSTOMER
IDCUSTOMER (autoincrement generator)
CUSTOMERNAME
TB_PHONE
IDPHONE
IDCUSTOMER (foreing key from TB_CUSTOMER)
PHONE
I have a registration form developed in Delphi. The table data TB_PHONE are handled using a dbgrid. I can not assign the value of the field IDCUSTOMER in TB_PHONE, because it was not generated by the Firebird generator. How can I make the relationship between the tables? I want to implement it without first saving the table data TB_CUSTOMER. I'm using datamodules with IBDAC.
Any sugest?
Before detail table can be inserted into, you should have PK-index over master-table updated and having proper master-ID in it. That means that some piece of code should insert master-record before inserting detail-record. Where this piece of code would be - is only limited by your fantasy.
Few arrangements include
insert the master-row in your application. Read the id of the row. Insert detail-row using this id.
read ID from then Generator, then insert both rows (master 1st) using the obtained ID
create a stored procedure, inserting both rows and returning ID (implementing #1 or #2 server-side)
use EXECUTE BLOCK - basically ad hoc anonymous SQL procedure. But that only is available in FB 2.x and except for not using namespace it is inferior to #3.
add BEFORE INSERT trigger onto detail table, searching for ID in master and adding one if not found. This would slow down all insert operations (even when master-ID already exists - that should be checked), would not be able to fill all other master columns but ID and is potentially dangerous due to hiding application logic problems. But still that can be implemented (though ugly and dirty method)
create master-join-detail VIEW and add INSERT trigger for it, propagating the new view-row into both master-table and details-table.
et cetera
I want to implement it without first saving the table data TB_CUSTOMER
There's your problem. You need the primary key from the master table before you can save the detail. That's just the way it works. But if what you want is to make sure that the values get saved together, you can do that as a transaction. In Firebird, you can do it like this:
Begin a transaction. Exactly how you do that depends on which DB library you're using to access your Firebird database.
Run an INSERT INTO ... RETURNING statement to insert the row into your master table and retrieve the generated value as a single operation.
Use the generated PK value to fill in the FK value on your detail table.
Insert the detail row.
Commit the transaction.
I have the challenge of needing to audit data changes made by users of an MVC application.
Auditing creation and deletion of records is easy.
Updates is proving to be the problem.
I'm looking for a way to automate this, but the problem I have is that the application is using stored procedures to bring back EF "complex types".
These are then used to build a view model, and after postback, the controller receives a new view model built from the form values passed back from the view. Therefore the original values are no longer available.
Does anyone have any suggestions for a secure way to keep the original values so they can be compared with the updated values, so that changes can be stored?
(I appreciate I could go back to the database for these, but is not efficient, and I would have to retain all the parameters to remake the same call, and find a way to automate that part of the process).
Have you tried an Audit Trigger using the INSERTED and DELETED tables.
http://weblogs.asp.net/jgalloway/archive/2008/01/27/adding-simple-trigger-based-auditing-to-your-sql-server-database.aspx
OR
In your stored procedures for insert,delete,update you can make use FOR XML AUTO. To get the XML for the record and add it to an audit table.
http://www.a2zdotnet.com/View.aspx?Id=71
UPDATE A T-SQL example
BEGIN
-- these tables would be in your database
DECLARE #table TABLE(ID INT IDENTITY(1,1) PRIMARY KEY, STR VARCHAR(10), DT DATETIME)
DECLARE #audit_table TABLE(AuditXML XML, Type VARCHAR(10), Time DATETIME)
-- this is defined at the top of your stored procedure
DECLARE #temp_table TABLE(PK INT)
-- your stored procedure will add an OUTPUT to the temp table
INSERT INTO #table
OUTPUT inserted.ID INTO #temp_table
VALUES ('test1', GetDate()),
('test2', GetDate() + 2)
-- at the end of your stored procedure update your audit table
INSERT INTO #audit_table
VALUES(
(
SELECT *
FROM #table
WHERE ID IN (SELECT PK FROM #temp_table)
FOR XML AUTO
),
'INSERTION',
GETDATE()
)
-- your audit table will have the record data
SELECT * FROM #audit_table
END
In the example above you could make temp_table a clone of table (have all of the columns from table) and in your OUTPUT clause use INSERTED.* INTO #temp_table, this would avoid have to reselect the records before getting the FOR XML AUTO. Another note, for stored procedures that do DELETE you would use DELETED.* instead of INSERTED.* in your OUTPUT.
If using SQL Server I recommend that you look into Change Data Capture (CDC).
It's an out of the box solution for auditing changes to the underlying tables of your application and it's relatively straightforward to set up, so there is no need for a custom solution that you then have to maintain.
If you have any supporting applications for your site, they'll also be covered and it also has the benefit of auditing any changes made directly against the database, such as from a DBA running a script.
Since your asp.net application may be running under one particular account, you'll probably need to add additional tracking information to capture the user who made the change. Fortunately this is also relatively straightforward. The following Stack Overflow question covers an approach to this using the ObjectStateManager
I was lookging for this myself, found this, check out Tracker for EF
I am using stored procedure to extract data from two different databases to a ASP.NET application. My stored procedure work as follows
- Check if global temporary table exist or not say ##temp_table
- if exist then drop it and if not create new temporary table say ##temp_table
- Extract data from two different databases and fill it to Temporary table
- Select data from temporary table
- Drop temporary table
Now problem is that when number of users accessing the same page with same stored procedure as above then to some users it get error that temporary table already exist.
Now please some one help me to solve such problem or suggest me some alternate because I don't want to write query in side ASP code. Some one suggest me to use views. Waiting for your suggestions.
"##" tables are accessible by all connections to the SQL instance, while "#" tables are accessible only by the connection that created them. The functionality you are describing sounds like you should be using "#" tables, not "##" tables.
You must not create table, you must declare variable for temporary table storage...with the column you expect to fill out...declare table variable like this:
declare #tmpTable table(myID int,myName varchar(50));
fill it like
insert into #tmpTable
Select * from table1
use it like
select * from #tmpTable
there are 2 databases A AND B. i want to transfer data from a table in A TO a table in B. i want to use cursor for this. the duplicate datas when transferring should go to a table called duplicat table. I want a stored procedure to do the above. first i need to connect database A with database B using db link. i want the complete stored procedure. can anyone help plzzzzzzzzzz...........
Shouldn't you look for guidance rather then complete answer here, if you want to learn....
Google for how to create db link in oracle and how to use that in queries. Once this is done you just use the remote table as a normal table.
Following links are useful
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/server.111/b28310/ds_admin002.htm
http://www.stanford.edu/dept/itss/docs/oracle/10g/server.101/b10759/statements_5005.htm
Here's my question:
I need to write a wizard, for customers to "create a new" very big objetc, with some other asociated with it: for example, Some images stored in another table (with relationships), some Lat's and Lang's for google earth, etc.
Each of them are stored in diferent tables in the Database, and that's why, i have to first insert to get the first object's Database generated ID to make the relationships with the another Objects. That's the reason I think puttin' Everything on just one View and hide selective DIVs with Jquery is not one of my option.
Session isn't an option because of the bigger object.
And because of the type of website, the wizard MUST be as follows:
Basic details of objetct 1
Images of object 1 (I will need here the ID of the first object)
Geolocations (with google maps, as before)
More details of object 1.
Preview
Publish
The point is, in step 4, user fill some fields that are required by the DB, and I cannot make them nullable as is it part of the customers reqs.
If somebody can a least give Ideas, will be nice...
Thanks in advance
You state that storing your object in Session is not desirable because of the size of the object. An alternative is to serialize that object and store it in the database. As the user progresses through the wizard, that object gets retrieved, updated and stored back in as a blob. Once they publish it, you can insert the appropriate records and remove the serialized object from whatever table you're storing them in.