I have a customer with many Addresses .Deleting the customer should delete all the customerAddresses too.
Provided I have sql server table "Customer" set up to have cascade delete
Is there anything special I need to do to make it work?
Any suggestions
No. It will just works. Cascading delete in a database is picked up by EDM Wizard and you will be having the same rule on your model's associations and it is recommended to have cascade in both the model and the database, or in neither to avoid incorrect expectations and unpredictable results.
Related
I am using coredata to save the server data through web services in my application and I am storing relationships as an object to the entity.
I have many entities e.g "Inspirations" and "Products" and both are related to each other. I have a problem whenever the records are updated in the third entity which is "Filters" then the relations of the entities broke and I cannot apply filters on the entities.
[object addRelatedInspirationsObject:related];
This is how I save relationships. I am not able to figure out why the relations are being broken once the entity is updated which has no direct link with the entity.
One thing more if I fetch and save the data of any one of the entities like "Inspirations" then all the relations start to work again.
Your code should work. Here are 2 things you need to check:
Make sure related is not nil when you call your method.
Make sure you call save on a valid managed object context.
From your question it seems that entities have 1 to many relationship between them. And by the code you supplied, every things should work fine. Just make sure, you are using the Filter object from the relationship like object.filter (or obj1.obj2.filter), not accessing it via a direct NSPredicate on Filter entity and updating it. And if you are using FRC, you might also need to generate a fault against the parent entities, to get your UI updates.
I have something like a Customer object with up to 50000 order in an ICollection<Orders>.
Assume the Custome being in the local cache, the orders not. How can i delete the Cutomer and all of its related orders without loading all of the Customer orders into the cache and marking them with setDeleted()?
What is the best practice here. I assume extending the public SaveResult SaveChanges(JObject saveBundle) method is the best way. Any other possibilities here on the client side like a flag delete_all_navigation_too()?
Thanks
I must suppose that you do not have and do not want cascade delete on your database. Personally, I'm "terrified" of deletes in general and try to avoid them. I prefer a soft delete (marking a record as inactive). But not everyone agrees or can follow suit
I would consider adding a Web API method (say "DeleteCustomerAndOrders") to your controller to do it. You can call any API method from your client, not just a Breeze method.
In recommending this, I'm assuming that this kind of thing is a relative rarity in your app. You don't need a general purpose deleter, a deleter that takes an array of parent object IDs, a deleter that will delete some child objects and not others, ... etc., etc.
Follow this path and you will have moved the problem from the client to the server. That's good: you didn't have to load the orders on the client. Now you have to get rid of them on the server. If you're using Entity Framework, you face the same challenge of deleting the orders without loading them. Check out Alex James' solution: Bulk-deleting in LINQ to Entities.
Simplest approach that I can come up with is to create a cascade delete constraint on the database so that when a customer is deleted all of its orders get deleted as well. Then simply delete the customer on the client and call 'SaveChanges'. In addition, since Breeze does not yet support client side 'cascaded' deletes ( we are considering this one), you will need to iterate over any client side orders that are already loaded and 'detach' them.
I am using EF4 with the EDM designer. I have two tables : Users and Links. The association between them is that a user can post multiple (*) links and a link can have at most (0..1) one user (the user who posted the link) or none (null).
My goal is that when I delete a user, the FK in all its links is set to null. The problem is that EF4 seems to support only to actions : Cascade and None.
How do I implement the On Delete Set Null rule with EF4?
EF uses this rule by default when working with loaded entities. If you mark loaded user as deleted all loaded links will lose reference to this user. For not loaded entities you must set this rule in the database.
I want to have a relation between views in EF. I am following this post to modify it in the xml file.
http://smehrozalam.wordpress.com/2009/08/12/entity-framework-creating-a-model-using-views-instead-of-tables/.
I am getting error,
Custom tool error: Multiplicity is not valid in Role 'VIEW' in relationship 'FK_'. Because the Dependent Role refers to the key properties, the upper bound of the multiplicity of the Dependent Role must be 1.
I am not really sure if I am going the right path.
The main goal of doing this is to use this entity over oData, and have links to the Ids in the view. I am not using the tables directly, because the table has Ids and I want the names to be sent back to the client. The relationship should give the child details.
If there is any other way to achieve this, please help!!
Thanks in Advance
I have 2 entities (say People and Books) that have two many-to-many relationships. I have created two different linking tables - e.g. the linking tables are called BooksCheckedOutByPeople and BooksOnHoldByPeople.
EF 4.0 correctly makes two relationships. It calls them something like PeopleBooks and PeopleBooks1.
When I am making Linq queries, how do I tell Linq to use a specific one of these relationships? Is there any way in Linq to specify one relationship instead of the other?
Say I'm creating a query against People and I want to get the Books for BooksCheckedOutByPeople and thus I need to use the relationship PeopleBooks.
Thanks.
You should be able to rename "PeopleBooks" and "PeopleBooks1" to more informative property names by editing the model EF generates for you. Something like "BooksOnHold" and "BooksCheckedOut".
At that point, when writing your LINQ queries, just reference the right navigation properties (as they're called). LINQ uses whichever properties you specify, and the Entity Framework should generate a unique navigation property for each collection.
Edit
I just fired up VS2010 to copy your model and poke around a bit.
I see that EF4 did indeed generate two Navigation Properties foor Book and Person, called People and People1, and Books and Books1 (respectively).
If you select any of these Navigation Properties in the Model Browser and look at the Properties pane, you should be able to see which table is correlated to that association and rename the property appropriately. Here's a screenshot from my PC:
You can see that I've selected the "People" nav property for the "Book" entity. The association in this case is determined by BooksCheckedOutByPeople, so I can rename the property to "PeopleCheckingOut", or something more useful than "People". When I'm using LINQ-to-Entities later, I then reference the "PeopleCheckingOut" property to query that collection on any specific Book.