MVC3 model set up - Code First EF - asp.net-mvc

I'm trying to create a list of train journeys (among other things) in MVC, using code first Entity Framework and wondered how I could map foreign keys for the stations. The Journey model/table will have a DepartureStationID and an ArrivalStationID which will be foreign keys linking to one table/model, called Station.
Here is the code for both these models:
public class Station
{
public int StationID { get; set; }
public string StationName { get; set; }
public string StationLocation { get; set; }
}
public class Journey
{
public int JourneyID { get; set; }
public int DepartureID { get; set; }
public int ArrivalID { get; set; }
public int OperatorID { get; set; }
public string JourneyCode { get; set; }
public virtual Operator Operator { get; set; }
public virtual Station DepartureStation { get; set; }
public virtual Station ArrivalStation { get; set; }
}
There is another foreign key value in there, namely Operator and that has mapped successfully, but the departure and arrivals haven't, and return null values in the view: (#Html.DisplayFor(modelItem => item.DepartureStation.StationName).
When I looked in the database, there had been two additional fields created by EF:
DepartureStation_StationID
ArrivalStation_StationID
And the SQL relationship was between the station table and the two fields above, rather than DepartureID and ArrivalID
So, my question is - Do I need to do something different in the model when referencing the same table for two fields? I don't know why those additional fields were added so I presume I've set up the model incorrectly.
Thanks

For completeness, here's the same thing with fluent configuration.
public class MyDb : DbContext
{
public DbSet<Journey> Journeys { get; set; }
public DbSet<Operator> Operators { get; set; }
public DbSet<Station> Stations { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder builder)
{
builder.Entity<Journey>()
.HasRequired(j => j.DepartureStation)
.WithMany()
.HasForeignKey(j => j.DepartureID);
builder.Entity<Journey>()
.HasRequired(j => j.ArrivalStation)
.WithMany()
.HasForeignKey(j => j.ArrivalId);
// ... Same thing for operator ...
base.OnModelCreating(builder);
}
}
Edit: To address your above comment about the cascade delete, you can add .WillCascadeOnDelete(false) after .HasForeignKey() and that might help (although you'll then have to delete Journey records manually)

Add the folowing attributes on your navigation properties :
public class Journey
{
public int JourneyID { get; set; }
public int DepartureID { get; set; }
public int ArrivalID { get; set; }
public int OperatorID { get; set; }
public string JourneyCode { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("OperatorID")]
public virtual Operator Operator { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("DepartureID")]
public virtual Station DepartureStation { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("ArrivalID")]
public virtual Station ArrivalStation { get; set; }
}
And of course you need to regenerate your database in order to apply the new configuration.
Hope this will help.

Related

MVC implementation of many to many relationships

This is done using MVC .net framework and entity framework "database first" approach. There is a many to many relationship between two tables. They are connected through third table that has combined key as id from first table and id from second table.
public class ManyToManyTable
{
[Required]
[Key, Column(Order=0)]
public int firsttableid { get; set; }
[Required]
[Key, Column(Order=1)]
public int secondtableid { get; set; }
public int something { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("firsttableid")]
public virtual FirstTable firstTable { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("secondtableid")]
public virtual SecondTable secondTable { get; set; }
}
First and Second table have some id which is primary key.
I want to create View and Controller method that enables master detail entry form for this ManyToManyTable. that would have FirstTable in Master and SecondTAble in details, and all to be saved in ManyToManyTable when button Save is pressed.
Of course, both First and Second Table have this property:
public virtual ICollection<ManyToManyTable> ManyToManyTables { get; set; }
What is the easiest way to implement cases like this one?
Thank you!
EF has a default conventions for many-to-many relationships. No need to create specific
mapping class. You have to include navigation properties in both "FirstTable" and "SecondTable" Class as shown below.
public class FirstTable
{
public FirstTable()
{
secondTableProperties = new HashSet<SecondTable>();
}
public int Id { get; set; }
public int MyProperty2 { get; set; }
public int MyProperty3 { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<SecondTable> secondTableProperties { get; set; }
}
public class SecondTable
{
public SecondTable()
{
FirstTableProperties = new HashSet<FirstTable>();
}
public int Id { get; set; }
public int MyProperty2 { get; set; }
public int MyProperty3 { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<FirstTable> FirstTableProperties { get; set; }
}
Remove mapping class from DBContext , only include above two classes. Build and run the application , EF will automatically create a Mapping table in SQL server. Usually the Mapping table contains only the primary keys of other two tables.
You can use Fluent API to take some control on the created mapping table
modelBuilder.Entity<FirstTable>()
.HasMany<SecondTable>(s => s.FirstTableProperties)
.WithMany(c => c.secondTableProperties)
.Map(cs =>
{
cs.MapLeftKey("FirstTableId");
cs.MapRightKey("SecondTableId");
cs.ToTable("ManyToManyTable");
});
If you want to work with a join table with additional properties, above mentioned many-to-many relationship won't work . In that case you will have to create two one-to-many relationships as shown below.
public class FirstTable
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int MyProperty2 { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<ManyToManyTable> manytomany { get; set; }
}
public class SecondTable
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int MyProperty2 { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<ManyToManyTable> manytomany { get; set; }
}
public ManyToManyTable
{
[Required]
[Key, Column(Order=0)]
public int firsttableid { get; set; }
[Required]
[Key, Column(Order=1)]
public int secondtableid { get; set; }
public int AdditionalProperty { get; set; }
public virtual FirstTable first { get; set; }
public virtual SecondTable Second { get; set; }
}

Defining multiple Foreign Key for the Same table in Entity Framework Code First

I have two entities in my MVC application and I populated the database with Entity Framework 6 Code First approach. There are two city id in the Student entity; one of them for BirthCity, the other for WorkingCity. When I define the foreign keys as above an extra column is created named City_ID in the Student table after migration. Id there a mistake or how to define these FKs? Thanks in advance.
Student:
public class Student
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Surname { get; set; }
public int BirthCityID { get; set; }
public int LivingCityID { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("BirthCityID")]
public virtual City BirthCity { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("LivingCityID")]
public virtual City LivingCity { get; set; }
}
City:
public class City
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string CityName { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Student> Students { get; set; }
}
To achieve what you want you need to provide some aditional configuration.Code First convention can identify bidirectional relationships, but not when there are
multiple bidirectional relationships between two entities.You can add configuration (using Data Annotations or the Fluent API) to present this
information to the model builder. With Data Annotations, you’ll use an annotation
called InverseProperty. With the Fluent API, you’ll use a combination of the Has/With methods to specify the correct ends of these relationships.
Using Data Annotations could be like this:
public class Student
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Surname { get; set; }
public int BirthCityID { get; set; }
public int LivingCityID { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("BirthCityID")]
[InverseProperty("Students")]
public virtual City BirthCity { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("LivingCityID")]
public virtual City LivingCity { get; set; }
}
This way you specifying explicitly that you want to relate the BirthCity navigation property with Students navigation property in the other end of the relationship.
Using Fluent Api could be like this:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Student>().HasRequired(m => m.BirthCity)
.WithMany(m => m.Students).HasForeignKey(m=>m.BirthCityId);
modelBuilder.Entity<Student>().HasRequired(m => m.LivingCity)
.WithMany().HasForeignKey(m=>m.LivingCityId);
}
With this last solution you don't need to use any attibute.
Now, the suggestion of #ChristPratt in have a collection of Student in your City class for each relationship is really useful. If you do that, then the configurations using Data Annotations could be this way:
public class Student
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Surname { get; set; }
public int BirthCityID { get; set; }
public int LivingCityID { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("BirthCityID")]
[InverseProperty("BirthCityStudents")]
public virtual City BirthCity { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("LivingCityID")]
[InverseProperty("LivingCityStudents")]
public virtual City LivingCity { get; set; }
}
Or using Fluent Api following the same idea:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Student>().HasRequired(m => m.BirthCity)
.WithMany(m => m.BirthCityStudents).HasForeignKey(m=>m.BirthCityId);
modelBuilder.Entity<Student>().HasRequired(m => m.LivingCity)
.WithMany(m => m.LivingCityStudents).HasForeignKey(m=>m.LivingCityId);
}
Sheesh. It's been a long day. There's actually a very big, glaring problem with your code, actually, that I completely missed when I commented.
The problem is that you're using a single collection of students on City. What's actually happening here is that EF can't decide which foreign key it should actually map that collection to, so it creates another foreign key specifically to track that relationship. Then, in effect you have no navigation properties for the collections of students derived from BirthCity and LivingCity.
For this, you have to drop down to fluent configuration, as there's no way to configure this properly using just data annotations. You'll also need an additional collection of students so you can track both relationships:
public class City
{
...
public virtual ICollection<Student> BirthCityStudents { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Student> LivingCityStudents { get; set; }
}
Then, for Student:
public class Student
{
...
public class StudentMapping : EntityTypeConfiguration<Student>
{
public StudentMapping()
{
HasRequired(m => m.BirthCity).WithMany(m => m.BirthCityStudents);
HasRequired(m => m.LivingCity).WithMany(m => m.LivingCityStudents);
}
}
}
And finally in your context:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Configurations.Add(new Student.StudentMapping());
}

Entity framework migration of Collections

I have a model that looks like this
public abstract class Item
{
public int ItemId { get; set; }
public String Title { get; set; }
public String Description { get; set; }
public DateTime PurchaseDate { get; set; }
public ICollection<String> Pictures { get; set; }
public Int32 MinimumPrice { get; set; }
public DateTime Deadline { get; set; }
public Boolean VisibleBids { get; set; }
public Boolean Handled { get; set; }
public DateTime PlacementDate { get; set; }
public ApplicationUser User { get; set; }
}
In my controller I do
db.Items.ToList()
This leaves the Pictures field for all fetched objects null because its how the entity framework works. What is a good solution to fetch them in one query?
I hope you already done with Navigation properties between your tables, Now you just need to make your collection virtual and use the concept of eager loading when you need data from both the tables
public virtual ICollection<String> Pictures { get; set; }
and use include in linq like
db.Items.Include("Pictures").ToList()
So here by making virtual navigation you are saying that only take the data of related entity when you needed and whenever you need the data use the Include for eager loading.
For setting navigation properties please have a look on the code.
Suppose the scenario where we have a Post and on this we have multiple comments like
class Posts
{
public int PostsId { get; set; }
public string PostsDescription { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Comments> Comments { get; set; }
}
class Comments
{
public int CommentsId { get; set; }
public string CommentsDescription { get; set; }
public int PostsId { get; set; }
public virtual Posts Posts { get; set; }
}

Asp.net Mvc Code First Many to Many with Additional Properties

As far as i know, i have two way to implement many-to-many relation in asp.net mvc using code-first.
1- Fluent Api
public class HrPerson
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<HrPersonTitle> HrPersonTitle { get; set; }
}
public class HrPersonTitle
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<HrPerson> HrPerson { get; set; }
}
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<HrPerson>()
.HasMany(s => s.HrPersonTitle)
.WithMany(c => c.HrPerson)
.Map(t =>
{
t.MapLeftKey("HrPersonId")
.MapRightKey("HrPersonTitleId")
.ToTable("HrMapPersonTitle");
});
}
2-Custom Mapping Table
public class HrPerson
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<HrMapPersonTitle> HrMapPersonTitle { get; set; }
}
public class HrPersonTitle
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<HrMapPersonTitle> HrMapPersonTitle { get; set; }
}
public class HrMapPersonTitle
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int HrPersonId { get; set; }
public int HrPersonTitleId { get; set; }
public virtual HrPerson HrPerson { get; set; }
public virtual HrPersonTitle HrPersonTitle { get; set; }
public string Note { get; set; }
public bool Deleted { get; set; }
}
My questions:
If i choose second way, i am not able to reach HrPersonTitle.Name property from HrPerson model in the view. How can i reach the properties ?
If i choose the first way i can reach the HrPersonTitle.Name but i am not able to add more property in the map file ? How can i add more properties?
Regards.
When you create a M2M without a payload (just the foreign key relationships, no extra data), EF collapses the relationship so that you can query directly without having to explicitly go through the join table. However, if you need a payload, then EF can no longer manage the relationship in this way.
So, if you want to get the title, you have to go through HrMapPersonTitle:
#foreach (var title in Model.HrMapPersonTitle)
{
#title.HrPersonTitle.Name
}
Both these methods seem overkill maybe. I don't know your full intentions however I implement this all the time at work and I use the following:
public class HrPerson
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<HrPersonTitle> HrPersonTitles { get; set; }
}
public class HrPersonTitle
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<HrPerson> HrPersons { get; set; }
}
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<HrPerson>()
.HasMany(s => s.HrPersonTitles)
.WithMany(c => c.HrPersons);
}
If you are using code first and you try and access either mapping within the DbContext it should Lazy Load your information and every property should be accessible.
I do have one question though. Are you sure it should be many to many, do they really have multiple titles?

EF4 - Can a POCO be used as both an Entity and ComplexType?

I am using EF4 CTP5. Here are my POCOs:
public class Address
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Line1 { get; set; }
public string Line2 { get; set; }
public string City { get; set; }
public string State { get; set; }
public string PostalCode { get; set; }
}
public class Customer
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public List<Address> Addresses { get; set; }
public List<Order> Orders { get; set; }
}
public class Order
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public decimal Total { get; set; }
public Address ShippingAddress { get; set; }
public Address BillingAddress { get; set; }
}
Is there a way to get Address to be a ComplexType for the Order class? After playing around with this, I'm guessing not, but maybe there's a way I haven't seen.
EDIT: In response to Shawn below, I gave it my best shot:
//modelBuilder.Entity<Order>().Ignore(o => o.BillingAddress);
//modelBuilder.Entity<Order>().Ignore(o => o.ShippingAddress);
modelBuilder.Entity<Order>()
.Property(o => o.BillingAddress.City).HasColumnName("BillingCity");
Fails at runtime with error "The configured property 'BillingAddress' is not a declared property on the entity 'Order'." Trying to use Ignore() doesn't work. Next, the Hanselman article is CTP4, but the CTP5 equivalent is:
modelBuilder.Entity<Order>().Map(mapconfig =>
{
mapconfig.Properties(o => new {
o.Id
, o.Total
, o.BillingAddress.City
});
mapconfig.ToTable("Orders");
});
Fails with error "Property 'BillingAddress.City' of type 'Order' cannot be included in its mapping."
I give up. Maybe the final release will have something like this. Or maybe I need to switch to NHibernate =)
All you need to do is to place ComplexTypeAttribute on Address class:
[ComplexType]
public class Address
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Line1 { get; set; }
public string Line2 { get; set; }
public string City { get; set; }
public string State { get; set; }
public string PostalCode { get; set; }
}
Alternatively, you can achieve this by fluent API:
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.ComplexType<Address>();
}
But you cannot have Address type as to be both an Entity and a Complex Type, it's one way or another.
Take a look at this blog post where I discuss this at length:
Associations in EF Code First CTP5: Part 1 – Complex Types
If you want Address to be in the same table as Order, you're going to have to tell EF that in the DbContext OnModelCreating override.
Take a look here: http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2010/07/23/entity-framework-4-code-first-custom-database-schema-mapping.aspx

Resources