My project specifications are ASP.net MVC3 Application with Entity Framework.
The problem is that Customer wise the database will be created. Individual application individual database is working fine for me.
But i want a single application and multiple databases should be used with that.
How to achieve the same?
Instead of creating your entity connections using the default constructor and web.config-driven connection string, you need to manually build the entity connection string and feed it into it on construction using one of the other constructors. There's usually one that takes a string, and another that takes an EntityConnection instance as well.
If the only thing that changes is the name of the database, then you can probably get away with a format string - where you perhaps take the one that's currently in your web.config - which will look something like this:
metadata=res://*;provider=System.Data.SqlClient;provider connection string="Data Source=[server];Initial Catalog=[db];User ID=[user];Password=[password]"
Note - [server], [db], [user] and [password] here are placeholders.
And simply replace the [db] with {0}.
Then - assuming you can derive a database name from a user you might do something like this following:
public string BaseConnectionString {
get{
//TODO: Get base connection string - can just bake in the constant string with
//with the format placeholder. A better thing would be to add it as an
//AppSetting in web.config
}
}
//this now becomes you're primary way of getting a database connection for a user.
public MyEntities GetEntities(User user)
{
var eConnectionString = GetConnectionString(user);
return new MyEntities(eConnectionString);
}
public string GetConnectionString(User user)
{
var dbName = get_db_name_for_user(user);
return string.Format(BaseConnectionString, dbName);
}
This is but one way to achieve this. In an IOC environment it would be possible to hide all of this behind a simple Resolve<> call.
Related
In a solution, I have two DALs. Each accesses a different server.
The first server/database contains a table that will provide database names.
var db = "db_1"; // can be db_1, db_2, db_3, etc.
The second server contains many databases - each containing an identical table that needs to be queried.
I need to be able to dynamically switch contexts depending upon the db value. I'd like to be able to pass the db var to a business layer that returns/uses the correct Context.
You can create two models for this. One for your database containing the tables that provide the database names, and the other for the other databases.
If you are using the db first approach, your context object will be created with a default connection string. Since it is a partial class you can extend it to take a connection string like so...
public partial class MyContext
{
public MyContext(string nameOrConnectionString) : base(nameOrConnectionString)
}
This is where at runtime you will pass the connection string of the server/database you pulled from the first context. Something like this is what it will look like...
...
using(var dbNameContext = new DatabaseNameContext())
{
var dbName = dbNameContext.DBNames.FirstOrDefault(dbn => dbn.Name == "db1");
var connectionString = "metadata=res://*/Database..." + dbName.Name;
using(var dbContexts = new MyContext(connectionString))
{
var MyDataList = dbContexts.Data.ToList();
}
}
Obviously you should fix the connection string to be like your own and place the dbName where it belongs in the connection string.
You should make sure you have a plan intact for keeping all of the different tables in different databases the same so that the model is accurate. Otherwise you will get RTEs.
I have one issue I am trying to resolve for days now, but I can’t get the right approach.
I am using EF4 and I have one application where I use DataBase First, which originally created the ObjectContext, and I donwloaded the DbContext generator and generated it.
The thing is, I need the application to be able to get the database SCHEMA from some configuration file, instead of ALWAYS using the “dbo” default.
I was trying to use the “ToTable” method (so I can specify the schema) in the “OnModelCreating” overload method but as this article sais, as I am using DataBase First, that method is not called.
How can I make the schema name configurable?
Is that even possible?
I read this article too, where it says I can combine database first with code first but I can’t see how to do that if I can’t use the "OnModelCreating" method.
Thanks a lot in advance!!!
I don't know about configuring schema. However if you want your db first approach to changed to the code first, just change the string parameter of your DbContext constructor.
Suppose that you have the following DbContext that EF Db first created for you:
public class MyDbContext : DbContext
{
public MyDbContext()
: base("Name=DefaultConnection")
{
}
// DbSets ...
}
change that to the following to start using code first and all magic tools of it (migration, etc.):
public class MyDbContext : DbContext
{
public MyDbContext()
: base("YourDbFileName")
{
}
// DbSets ...
}
It causes that EF creates a new connection string using SQL Express on your local machine in your web.config file with the name YourDbFileName, something just like the early DefaultConnection Db first created.
All you may need to continue your way, is that edit the YourDbFileName ConStr according to your server and other options.
first of all here is my situation. I am programming an intranet application using ASP.NET MVC 3 with Entity Framework 4.1. My application has been developed using the "Unit of Work" and "Repository" design patterns.
How ever in my opinion it should go the way that my application has an unit of work that provides a central access to all the repositories which further provide access to the entities.
Lets say I have a entity called "ProductApprovalDocument" with the properties "id", "creationDate" and "approvalDecission" stored in the database. Now I want the user to be able to access a PDF file of the document thats shortly described by the entity. Because the files are stored in a central directory on a file server using the URL format "[fileServerDirectoryPath]/[ProductApprovalDocument.id].pdf", I do not want to save an extra property for that filepath on the database. What I would like to do, is give the entity an extra property called "filepath" that automatically constructs the path with the given information and returns it.
Now the Problem:
I use an interface called FileService to abstract file access from the rest of the application. Now in my case I would have to access the UnitOfWork object out of the entity model, to retrieve the current FileService implementetion and get the preconfigured filepath. I think that's the totaly wrong way because to me an entity model should only be used as a data container not more or less.
Now the Question:
How do I handle such a situation. I would not like to always set the filepath property through the controller because ist more or less static and therefore could be done somehow automatic by the model.
Edit (final solution):
Thanks to the answer of Andre Loker I gained another point of view to my problem.
What was the central target I wanted to reach?
I wanted the user to gain access to a file stored on a fileserver.
Do I have to provide every displayed entity with the total filepath?
No! Think about the principle of MVC! User actions get processed by the controller just in time. You don't have to provide information untill it really get's used.
So the solution is just to render all data as usual but instead of displaying a static html link to the files, you have to include an ActionLink to the Controller which calculates the filepath on the fly and automatically redirects the user to the file.
In the View do this:
#Html.ActionLink(Model.ID.ToString(), "ShowProductApprovalDocumentFile", "ProductApprovalDocument", new { ProductApprovalDocumentID = Model.ID }, null)
instead of this:
#Model.ID
And add an corresponding Action to the controller:
public ActionResult ShowProductApprovalDocumentFile(int ProductApprovalDocumentID )
{
return Redirect(_unitOfWork.FileService.GetFilePathForProductApprovalDocument(ProductApprovalDocumentID));
}
Thanks to the guys that took the time to give me an answer and special thanks to Andre who lead me to the satisfying answer! :)
If I understand the property correctly, there are several options:
1) Make the FilePath property use a service locator to find the FileService:
public string FilePath {
get {
FileService fileService = DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<FileService>();
return fileService.GetFilePathForDocument(this);
}
}
While I'm not a hugh fan of static service locators as they make testing more difficult, this could be a viable option. To make it more easily testable you can make the file service locator injectable:
private static readonly Func<FileService> defaultFileServiceLocator = ()=>DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<FileService>():
private Func<FileService> fileServiceLocator = defaultFileServiceLocator;
public Func<FileService> FileServiceLocator {
get { return fileServiceLocator; }
set { fileServiceLocator = value ?? defaultFileServiceLocator; }
}
And then use this in FilePath
public string FilePath {
get {
FileService fileService = fileServiceLocator();
return fileService.GetFilePathForDocument(this);
}
}
This way you can inject your own file service locator during testing.
2) Explicitly require the FileService when retrieving the file path. Instead of a FilePath property you'd have:
public string GetFilePath(FileService service){
service.GetFilePathForDocument(this);
}
The problem with this is of course that now the caller of GetFilePath needs to have a FileService. This isn't much of a problem for controllers, because if you use an IoC you can inject a FileService into the controller constructor. This approach is the cleaner one as it doesn't depend on service locators, but as you see it is slightly more inconvenient for the caller.
3) Inject the FileService into the document class itself.
Instead of using a file service locator you'd inject the file service itself when you construct your ProductApprovalDocument. With this approach you can use a simple FilePath property again. The main problem is that this often doesn't play too well with ORMs, as they often construct the objects using a default constructor and you'd have to somehow hook into the object construction process to inject the dependencies. Also, I'm not a big fan of injection services into domain objects.
4) You set the FilePath from outside the entity. As you said this should be done somewhat automatically as you don't want to do it manually every time. This would require some layer through which all entities need to pass which sets up the FilePath property.
5) Don't make FilePath a property of ProductApprovalDocument at all. This would be a reasonable choice, too. ProductApprovalDocument doesn't know anything about its FilePath, so why should it be a property? Its the FileService that calculates the value. You can still have a distinct view model version of ProductApprovalDocument which does have a FilePath property. You'd set the property when you create your view model:
var model = new ProductApprovalDocumentViewModel();
mapper.Map(realDocument, model); // map common properties with AutoMapper or so
model.FilePath = fileService.GetFilePathForDocument(realDocument);
However, if ProductApprovalDocument needs to do something with its FilePath (why would it?) this approach doesn't work anymore.
Personally I'd go with solution 5, 2 or 1 in that order of precedence, where applicable.
Whilst I would be hesitant to rely on being able to calculate the filepath and I would prefer to store it as part of the entity (in case it ever needs to change for some reason), in your situation if I was adamant I wanted to do it the way you've said, I think I would extend the FileService/ViewModel to have a Filepath property which was derived in the fashion you have stated.
e.g. if I wanted to create a download link I'd do this in the ViewModel
public string FilePath
{
get
{
return String.Format(#"thehardcodedbit{0}.pdf",ID);
}
}
EDIT: If you have an Entity generated by EF4.x then it will have been generated as a partial class so you could always extend it like this (I have done this sort of thing and it works okay):
Say the generated entity looks like this:
Namespace Da_Wolf.Model.Entities.File
{
public partial class UploadedFile
{....}
}
Then you could create a partial class like this:
Namespace Da_Wolf.Model.Entities.File
{
public partial class UploadedFile
{
public string FilePath
{
get
{
return String.Format(#"thehardcodedbit{0}.pdf",ID);
}
}
}
}
Now you have the property you desire available everywhere without adding anything to the ViewModels.
I use WCF with my ASP.NET MVC app, my data service get data from my (EF 4.1) .mdf file. But there is some feild that I want to show with authentication, for example:
public static void InitializeService(DataServiceConfiguration config)
{
config.SetEntitySetAccessRule("Exercies", EntitySetRights.All);
config.SetServiceOperationAccessRule("GetAllExercies", ServiceOperationRights.All);
config.DataServiceBehavior.MaxProtocolVersion = DataServiceProtocolVersion.V3;
}
[WebGet]
public IQueryable<Exercise> GetAllExercies(string name, string pass)
{
if (Membership.ValidateUser(name, pass))
return CurrentDataSource.Exercies;
else
return CurrentDataSource.Exercies.Where(e => e.Public == true);
}
Now when user access httx://localhost/MyService.svc/Exercies, they can get everything although they are not given the username and pass.
My temporary solution is re name GetAllExercies to just Exercies but I not sure is there any better way...
Yes, there is a better solution: query interceptors. In fact using the same name for entity set and service operation tends to lead to problems in certain scenarios (the $metadata is "confusing" for the clients). It's also not 100% secure (doesn't prevent accessing the entity through some navigation property if you have that).
See this http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd744842.aspx. The idea is that you make the auth filter part of the entity set query, and WCF DS Service makes sure that it will be used everywhere that entity set is accessed.
I'm following Steve Sanderson's example from this ASP.NET MVC book on creating a model by hand instead of using diagramming tools to do it for me. So in my model namespace I place a class called MySystemModel with something like the following in it
[Table(Name="tblCC_Business")]
public class Business
{
[Column(IsPrimaryKey=true, IsDbGenerated=false)]
public string BusinessID { get; set; }
// this is done because Business column and Business have interfering names
[Column(Name="Business")] public string BusinessCol { get; set; }
}
This part of it is all fine. The problem however is returning multiple result sets from a stored procedure, but mixing and matching SQL with LINQ modelling. We do this because the LINQ to SQL translation is too slow for some of our queries (there's really no point arguing this point here, it's a business requirement). So basically I use actual SQL statements along with my LINQ models in my "repository" like so:
public IEnumerable<MyType> ListData(int? arg)
{
string query = "SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE argument = {0}";
return _dc.ExecuteQuery<MyType>(query, arg);
//c.GetTable<MyType>(); <-- this is another way of getting all data out quickly
}
Now the problem I'm having is how to return multiple result sets as I'm not extending DataContext, like so:
public ContractsControlRepository()
{
_dc = new DataContext(ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["MyConnectionString"].ToString());
}
This link describes how multiple result sets are returned from stored procedures.
[Function(Name="dbo.VariableResultShapes")]
[ResultType(typeof(VariableResultShapesResult1))]
[ResultType(typeof(VariableResultShapesResult2))]
public IMultipleResults VariableResultShapes([Parameter(DbType="Int")] System.Nullable<int> shape)
{
IExecuteResult result = this.ExecuteMethodCall(this, ((MethodInfo)(MethodInfo.GetCurrentMethod())), shape);
return ((IMultipleResults)(result.ReturnValue));
}
So how do I turn this into something that can be used by my repository? I just need to be able to return multiple result sets from a repository which contains DataContext, and doesn't extend it. If you copied and pasted the previous extract into a repository like I've got it will just state how ExecuteMethodCall isn't available, but that's only available if you extend DataContext.
Resources
Guy Berstein's Blog
Every time I ask a question that has been hindering me for days on end I end up finding the answer within minutes. Anyway, the answer to this issue is that you have to extend DataContext in your repository. If like me you're worried about having to specify the connection string in every single controller then you can change the constructor in the repository class to something like this:
public ContractsControlRepository()
: base(ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["AccountsConnectionString"].ToString()) { }
This way when you instantiate your repository the connection is set up for you already, which gives you less to worry about, and actually centralizes specifying the connection string. Extending DataContext also means you have access to all of the protected methods such as ExecuteMethodCall used for calling stored procedures and bringing back, if you will, multiple result sets.