Currently i am using sql encryption and would like to continue using it through Linq. I have all my CRUD stored proc's wired up to the table in order to handle the encryption/decryption on the backend. Problem is my database model see's a field type of varbinary(max) which is used for the sql encryption storage. The retrieval sp for this table does the decryption thus returning a string value. How does one get around this. Seems like the model needs to recognize a string in place of the varbinary but i am unsure of how to handle this.
Thanks in advance.
So change the table mapping to a view mapping in the database model?
Off the top of my head, some choices:
Edit the ssdl manually.
Make a view and map that (you don't need to actually use it for anything but mapping).
Related
I'm working on a SQL Server 2005 database and I'm trying to pass a table variable from one stored procedure to another. Below is the structure of the table and my attempt.
#MyTable
EmployeeID FirstName LastName
1 Dummy Last
2 Some Name
I tried converting the table into XML and passing the XML as a parameter to the new SP.
SELECT * FROM #MyTable FOR XML AUTO
Result
<_x0040_MyTable EmployeeID="1" FirstName="Dummy" LastName="Last" />
<_x0040_MyTable EmployeeID="2" FirstName="Some" LastName="Name" />
But converting back from this XML to a table has become too complicated for my level of SQL knowledge. Am I on the right path? Is there an easy way?
Note - I have seen a few posts which suggests to use #temp tables and I would not prefer to use that solution. I would like to use the #MyTable parameter.
Erland Sommarskog is your friend here. The link below provides a table showing options. For SQL Server 2005, TVF aren't an option. You will likely need to use XML or a temp table to share the data. I know you say these two are the least desirable options for you, but for 2005, I think they are the most appropriate.
http://www.sommarskog.se/share_data.html
I have a requirement from a client to give them the option to add custom fields to a program i am going to write for them. The custom fields will be on a per/poco basis. What is the best way of handling custom properties like this. I am going to use SQL Server and ASP.NET MVC4.
Just need a starting point..
thanks in advance.
The way we handle this where I work is storing the information in a database table. We store the field name, the value, and some identifier for which object it belongs to. Sometimes we have an additional table stores the specific list of available values.
When it's pulled out of the db, we place it in a dictionary list. If you set up some conventions then it's not too bad building validation for the fields. I.E. any field name with "phone" in the name gets validated as a phone number.
I have an entity/table that uses sqlgeography.
Since EF 4.X doesn't support spatial types I'm instead sending the bytes of the field back and forth.
I have stored procs on the database side that handles the converstion and properties on the code side to do that job.
To add the properties in the code I used a partial class.
One of those properties is for the SqlGeography which simply wraps around the byte[] property to handle getting and setting.
This property is hidden from EF using the NotMappedAttribute.
The other is the property exposing the byte[] itself and is decorated with the EdmScalarPropertyAttribute and DataMemberAttribute.
I then go to the EF model designer (*.edmx) to point the entity model at the Insert/Update/Delete stored procs.
It finds the stored procs alright and realises that they (when appropriate) take a VARBINARY parameter.
It also has a drop down allowing you to select a property on the entity class which maps to that parameter.
However this drop down doesn't list either of my properties. I don't care about the SqlGeography property since that is meant to be hidden from EF, however it is vital for me to be able to point it at the byte[] property, as that is where the data comes from.
I would very much like to avoid database triggers or wrapper classes and addiitonal fields to fudge this in to working.
I tried manually editing the .edmx file to include the byte[] property, but then it just complains it's unmapped.
Can anyone give me some insight in to how to get this to work? Or an alternative method of achiving the end result?
We could use a view to create the binary field for us, but this then involves manually creating a lot of the xml for the relationships within the data.
This pretty much voids the point of using EF which is to make life simple and easy.
For this project We'll just add a binary field to the table then have sprocs to handle the converstion on the server and a property in a partial entity class for exposing the geography type in the model.
Next project I doubt we'll be using EF. Dapper is so much more painless, even if theres a touch more code writing involved.
Here's the links for using views if anyone thinks it would be applicable to them:
http://thedatafarm.com/blog/data-access/yes-you-can-read-and-probably-write-spatial-data-with-entity-framework/
http://smehrozalam.wordpress.com/2009/08/12/entity-framework-creating-a-model-using-views-instead-of-tables/
In the end we created a computed column for each table that exposes the spatial data as bytes.
We then use stored procs for inserting and updating the spatial data.
I'm working on creating an Entity Framework model for our database tables, and for the most part, things are going pretty well. However, I'm running into a bit of an issue mapping the stored procedures. See, the homebuilt ORM that our company has been using tends to use one sproc for inserting and updating, and differentiats the operations by passing a bit valued parameter called #IsInsert (I know, don't get me started). Entity Framework seems to expect separate sprocs for inserting and updating, so I figure that all I have to do is tell EF "pass true for this parameter when you're using it as an insert, false if it's an update". However, at least according to the designer UI, it doesn't seem to give me the option for any mapping other than fields on the entity object. Is there a way to pass a constant value (boolean true or false) to a sproc mapping in EF4?
Your best bet may be to use context.executestorequery(query) and keep it how it was before.
I want to update a single field in my table for a particular row. I am using Entity Framework 4 and Visual Studio 2010.
Options I can think of are:
Using a Stored Procedure
Direct connection to the database and using
sql statement
I am not aware of any more efficient method to perform this task.
[EDIT]
I would like to do the update in the same operation as the Get for that row, so that it is done in one DB call.
No need to complicate things. Just change the one property and SaveChanges. Unless you're doing something odd, that should only change the one column. Look at the SQL to verify.