I am using asp.net mvc for an application. I've taken some guidance from Rob Conery's series on the MVC storefront. I am using a very similar data access pattern to the one that he used in the storefront.
However, I have added a small difference to the pattern. Each class I have created in my model has a property called IsNew. The intention on this is to allow me to specify whether I should be inserting or updating in the database.
Here's some code:
In my controller:
OrderService orderService = new OrderService();
Order dbOrder = orderService.GetOrder(ID);
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
dbOrder.SomeField1 = "Whatever1";
dbOrder.SomeField2 = "Whatever2";
dbOrder.DateModified = DateTime.Now;
dbOrder.IsNew = false;
orderService.SaveOrder(dbOrder);
}
And then in the SQLOrderRepository:
public void SaveOrder(Order order)
{
ORDER dbOrder = new ORDER();
dbOrder.O_ID = order.ID;
dbOrder.O_SomeField1 = order.SomeField1;
dbOrder.O_SomeField2 = order.SomeField2;
dbOrder.O_DateCreated = order.DateCreated;
dbOrder.O_DateModified = order.DateModified;
if (order.IsNew)
db.ORDERs.InsertOnSubmit(dbOrder);
db.SubmitChanges();
}
If I change the controller code so that the dbOrder.IsNew = true; then the code works, and the values are inserted correctly.
However, if I set the dbOrder.IsNew = false; then nothing happens...there are no errors - it just doesn't update the order.
I am using DebuggerWriter here: http://www.u2u.info/Blogs/Kris/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=11 to trace the SQL that is being generated, and as expected, when the IsNew value is true, the Insert SQL is generated and executed properly. However, when IsNew is set to false, there appears to be no SQL generated, so nothing is executed.
I've verified that the issue here (LINQ not updating on .SubmitChanges()) is not the problem.
Any help is appreciated.
In your SaveOrder method you are always creating a new ORDER object. You need to change this so that if order.IsNew is false, it retrieves the existing one from the DB and updates it instead.
public void SaveOrder(Order order)
{
ORDER dbOrder;
if (order.IsNew)
{
dbOrder = new ORDER();
dbOrder.O_ID = order.ID;
}
else
{
dbOrder = (from o in db.ORDERS where o.O_ID == order.ID select o).Single();
}
dbOrder.O_SomeField1 = order.SomeField1;
dbOrder.O_SomeField2 = order.SomeField2;
dbOrder.O_DateCreated = order.DateCreated;
dbOrder.O_DateModified = order.DateModified;
if (order.IsNew)
db.ORDERs.InsertOnSubmit(dbOrder);
db.SubmitChanges();
}
I think you have the problem that your entity is detached from your context.
You should try to attach your entity back to your context if you want to update. The downside of LINQtoSQL is that for the re-attachment you'll need the original state of the object when it was detached...
Another solution is to re-get your entity from the context and copy all the data from your entity in the parameter. This will do until you'll have more complex entities.
What tvanfosson said.
I would just like to add that I use logic where if Id equals default(0 or Empty if using guids), then I assume it is new. Otherwise if I have the id passed in, then I go get the existing object and update it.
Related
There appears to be two ways to update a disconnected Entity Framework entity using the "attach" method.
Method One is to simply set the disconnected entity's state as modified:
myDbContext.Dogs.Attach(dog);
myDbContext.Entry(dog).State = EntityState.Modified;
myDbContext.SaveChanges();
This will save all fields on the "dog" object. But say you are doing this from an mvc web page where you only allow editing of Dog.Name, and the only Dog property contained on the page is Name. Then one could do Method Two:
myDbContext.Dogs.Attach(dog);
myDbContext.Entry(dog).Property(o => o.Name).CurrentValue = dog.Name;
myDbContext.Entry(dog).Property(o => o.Name).IsModified = true;
myDbContext.SaveChanges();
Method Two could get quite verbose when there are a lot of properties to update. This prompted me to attempt Method Three, setting IsModified = false on the properties I don't want to change. This does not work, throwing the runtime error "Setting IsModified to false for a modified property is not supported":
myDbContext.Dogs.Attach(dog);
myDbContext.Entry(dog).State = EntityState.Modified;
myDbContext.Entry(dog).Property(o => o.Owner).IsModified = false;
myDbContext.SaveChanges();
I'd much prefer to use Method One everywhere, but there are many instances where my asp.net mvc view does not contain every scalar property of the Dog class.
My questions are:
Are there any attributes I could use on the POCO class that would tell Entity Framework that I never want the property to up updated? Eg, [NeverUpdate]. I am aware of the [NotMapped] attribute, but that is not what I need.
Failing that, is there any way I can use Method One above (myDbContext.Entry(dog).State = EntityState.Modified;
) and exclude fields that I don't want updated?
P.S. I am aware of another way, to not use "attach" and simply fetch a fresh object from the database, update the desired properties, and save. That is what I am doing, but I'm curious if there is a way to use "attach," thus avoiding that extra trip to the database, but do it in a way that is not so verbose as Method Two above. By "fetch a fresh object" I mean:
Dog dbDog = myDbContext.Dogs.FirstOrDefault(d => d.ID = dog.ID);
dbDog.Name = dog.Name;
myDbContext.SaveChanges();
The following may work works.
myDbContext.Dogs.Attach(dog);
myDbContext.Entry(dog).State = EntityState.Modified;
var objectContext = ((IObjectContextAdapter) myDbContext).ObjectContext;
foreach (var entry in objectContext.ObjectStateManager.GetObjectStateEntries(EntityState.Modified).Where(entity => entity.Entity.GetType() == typeof(Dogs)))
{
// You need to give Foreign Key Property name
// instead of Navigation Property name
entry.RejectPropertyChanges("OwnerID");
}
myDbContext.SaveChanges();
If you want to do it in a single line, use the following extension method:
public static void DontUpdateProperty<TEntity>(this DbContext context, string propertyName)
{
var objectContext = ((IObjectContextAdapter) context).ObjectContext;
foreach (var entry in objectContext.ObjectStateManager.GetObjectStateEntries(EntityState.Modified).Where(entity => entity.Entity.GetType() == typeof(TEntity)))
{
entry.RejectPropertyChanges(propertyName);
}
}
And use it like this
// After you modify some POCOs
myDbContext.DontUpdateProperty<Dogs>("OwnerID");
myDbContext.SaveChanges();
As you can see, you can modify this solution to fit your needs, e.g. use string[] properties instead of string propertyName as the argument.
Suggested Approach
A better solution would be to use an Attribute as you suggested ([NeverUpdate]). To make it work, you need to use SavingChanges event (check my blog):
void ObjectContext_SavingChanges(object sender, System.Data.Objects.SavingChangesEventArgs e)
{
ObjectContext context = sender as ObjectContext;
if(context != null)
{
foreach(ObjectStateEntry entry in context.ObjectStateManager.GetObjectStateEntries(EntityState.Modified))
{
var type = typeof(entry.Entity);
var properties = type.GetProperties();
foreach( var property in properties )
{
var attributes = property.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(NeverUpdateAttribute), false);
if(attributes.Length > 0)
entry.RejectPropertyChanges(property.Name);
}
}
}
}
// Check Microsoft documentation on how to create custom attributes:
// http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/sw480ze8(v=vs.80).aspx
public class NeverUpdateAttribute: SystemAttribute
{
}
//In your POCO
public class Dogs
{
[NeverUpdate]
public int OwnerID { get; set; }
}
Warning: I did not compile this code. I'm not at home :/
Warning 2: I have just read the MSDN documentation and it says:
ObjectStateEntry.RejectPropertyChanges Method
Rejects any changes made to the property with the given name since the
property was last loaded, attached, saved, or changes were accepted.
The orginal value of the property is stored and the property will no
longer be marked as modified.
I am not sure what its behavior would be in the case of attaching a modified entity. I will try this tomorrow.
Warning 3: I have tried it now. This solution works. Property that is rejected with RejectPropertyChanges() method are not updated in the persistence unit (database).
HOWEVER, if the entity that is updated is attached by calling Attach(), the current context remains dirty after SaveChanges(). Assume that the following row exists in the database:
Dogs
ID: 1
Name: Max
OwnerID: 1
Consider the following code:
var myDog = new Dogs();
myDog.ID = 1;
myDog.Name = Achilles;
myDog.OwnerID = 2;
myDbContext.Dogs.Attach(myDog);
myDbContext.Entry(myDog).State = EntityState.Modified;
myDbContext.SaveChanges();
The current state of database after SaveChanges():
Dogs:
ID: 1
Name: Achilles
OwnerID: 1
The current state of myDbContext after SaveChanges():
var ownerId = myDog.OwnerID; // it is 2
var status = myDbContext.Entry(myDog).State; // it is Unchanged
So what you should do? Detach it after SaveChanges():
Dogs myDog = new Dogs();
//Set properties
...
myDbContext.Dogs.Attach(myDog);
myDbContext.Entry(myDog).State = EntityState.Modified;
myDbContext.SaveChanges();
myDbContext.Entry(myDog).State = EntityState.Detached;
Is there an equivalent of Rails ActiveRecord::Callbacks in ASP MVC?
http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/Callbacks.html
I'm in a situation where we are not using identities for our primary key. We do this for reasons specific to our DB sharding design. Because of this we have a lookup table to find the next ID for a specific table. I'd like to automatically get this value and set it in an abstract class whenever a model is created/updated and before it is saved. I also need to update the lookup table with an incremented 'nextID' after the save is successful.
I'm open to other solutions on how to do this without callbacks as well.
So you need the callback just to increment ID in the lookup table? AFAIK there is no equivalent in ASP.NET, may be you could try with Async Controllers (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee728598%28v=vs.100%29.aspx) and wait for a state change from the successful save, but I would prefer use a service specifically for this like Snowflake (https://github.com/twitter/snowflake/).
I found a solution using overrides as opposed to callbacks. It's my hope that ASP mvc adds support for callbacks as the framework continues to mature because callbacks allow for cleaner code by allowing the OnSave event to exist in the model[s] that the event is concerned with rather than the centralized DbContext class (separation of concerns).
Solution:
The SaveChanges method can be overridden in the Context Class (Entity Framework Power Tools creates the Context class is the 'Models' directory).
public override int SaveChanges()
{
// create a cache for id values in case their are multiple added entries in the dbcontext for the same entitytype
Dictionary<string, UniqueID> idCache = new Dictionary<string, UniqueID>();
IEnumerable<DbEntityEntry> changes = this.ChangeTracker.Entries();
foreach (var entry in changes)
{
//check if this is a new row (do nothing if its only a row update because there is no id change)
if (entry.State == System.Data.EntityState.Added)
{
//determine the table name and ID field (by convention)
string tableName = entry.Entity.GetType().Name;
string idField = entry.Entity.GetType().Name + "ID";
UniqueID id = null;
//if we've already looked this up, then use the cache
if (idCache.ContainsKey(tableName))
{
id = idCache[tableName];
}
//if we havn't looked this up before get it and add it to the cache
else
{
id = this.UniqueIDs.Find(tableName, idField);
//if it doesn't already exist in the lookup table create a new row
if (id == null)
{
id = new UniqueID(tableName, idField, 1);
// since this is a new entry add it
this.UniqueIDs.Add(id);
}
else
{
// set the state to modified
this.Entry(id).State = System.Data.EntityState.Modified;
}
}
entry.CurrentValues[tableName + "ID"] = id.NextID;
id.NextID = id.NextID + 1;
}
}
return base.SaveChanges();
}
I am making an MVC4 web application using Entity Framework 5 (Database-first with generated POCOs) for data access.
In the app, the user goes through several screens, creating or editing a document (called a 'case study'). When they arrive at the final screen, their document exists as a CaseStudy POCO in memory, and everything is great until it is time to save this structure to the database.
To store the document, I have defined several database tables, which in turn map to EF POCOs used by the business layer, which is then consumed by the MVC controllers. As such, short-lived DbContexts are used to retrieve POCOs and store them in session between requests.
As a result, the save screen must save the contents of this POCO that has navigational properties to existing table data (Category, Layout, and Sections tables), and also added or updated data (CaseStudySections and the CaseStudy itself). So all of the POCOs are either new, or the context used to retrieve them has long been disposed. In other words, they are all 'detached'.
What is unusual about this post is that I already have a working solution in hand. The problem is that it is bulky, brittle, and inelegant. I am posting the code below. Note the iteration through sub-collections, the explicit adds and attaches, having to get an entry object and mark individual properties as modified just so they will be updated, and the awful song and dance at the end to get the AdditionalMaterials collection synced up. If this is what is required to deal with detached POCOs in EF5 I will be disappointed.
Am I missing something here? Is this consistent with best practices? Is there a more graceful and/or concise way to attach a structure of POCOs and insert/update?
The code to save a case study:
public void SaveCaseStudy(CaseStudy caseStudy)
{
foreach (var s in caseStudy.CaseStudySections)
{
this.Entities.Sections.Attach(s.Section);
if (s.CreatedByRefId == default(Guid))
{
s.CreatedByRefId = this.UserRefId;
s.CreatedTime = DateTime.Now;
this.Entities.CaseStudySections.Add(s);
}
else
{
this.Entities.CaseStudySections.Attach(s);
var entry = this.Entities.Entry(s);
entry.Property(e => e.TextData).IsModified = true;
entry.Property(e => e.BinaryData).IsModified = true;
}
s.LastModifiedByRefId = this.UserRefId;
s.LastModifiedTime = DateTime.Now;
}
foreach (var m in caseStudy.AdditionalMaterials)
{
if (m.CreatedByRefId == default(Guid))
{
m.CreatedByRefId = this.UserRefId;
m.CreatedTime = DateTime.Now;
this.Entities.AdditionalMaterials.Add(m);
}
else
{
this.Entities.AdditionalMaterials.Attach(m);
}
m.LastModifiedByRefId = this.UserRefId;
m.LastModifiedByTime = DateTime.Now;
}
this.Entities.Layouts.Attach(caseStudy.Layout);
this.Entities.Categories.Attach(caseStudy.Category);
if (caseStudy.CreatedByRefId != default(Guid))
{
this.Entities.CaseStudies.Attach(caseStudy);
var entry = this.Entities.Entry(caseStudy);
entry.Property(e => e.CaseStudyName).IsModified = true;
entry.Property(e => e.CaseStudyTitle).IsModified = true;
}
else
{
this.Entities.CaseStudies.Add(caseStudy);
caseStudy.CreatedByRefId = this.UserRefId;
caseStudy.CreatedTime = DateTime.Now;
}
caseStudy.LastModifiedByRefId = this.UserRefId;
caseStudy.LastModifiedTime = DateTime.Now;
if (caseStudy.CaseStudyStatus != (int)CaseStudyStatus.Personalized)
{
caseStudy.CaseStudyStatus = (int)CaseStudyStatus.PendingApproval;
}
caseStudy.ApprovedByRefId = null;
caseStudy.ApprovedTime = null;
this.Entities.SaveChanges();
var existingAdditionalMaterialRefIds = caseStudy.AdditionalMaterials
.Select(m => m.AdditionalMaterialRefId)
.ToArray();
var additionalMaterialsToRemove = this.Entities.AdditionalMaterials
.Where(m =>
m.CaseStudyRefId == caseStudy.CaseStudyRefId &&
!existingAdditionalMaterialRefIds.Contains(m.AdditionalMaterialRefId))
.ToArray();
foreach (var additionalMaterialToRemove in additionalMaterialsToRemove)
{
this.Entities.AdditionalMaterials.Remove(additionalMaterialToRemove);
}
this.Entities.SaveChanges();
}
In general it is what you have to do. You must tell EF about each change you want to perform when attaching detached object graph. I don't say that your code cannot be simplified but you will still have to deal with every entity and setting its state if you want it to be added or modified.
Here is little bit older but still valid answer about the topic - in short nothing has changes since I wrote it, only new DbContext API was created which still sits on top of the old API. The best description of this topic I have seen so far is in book Programming Entity Framework: DbContext.
How about just doing:
db.CaseStudies.Attach(caseStudy);
db.Entry(caseStudy).State = EntityState.Modified;
db.SaveChange();
That will save all changes in your model to the db.
I am having trouble saving my entities after updating them. I can add new entities like this: add(student); but if I tried this:
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
db.Entry(student).State = EntityState.Modified;
db.SaveChanges();
return RedirectToAction("someView");
}
I get this error message:
System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DbUpdateConcurrencyException was unhandled by user code
Message=Store update, insert, or delete statement affected an unexpected number of rows (0). Entities may have been modified or
deleted since entities were loaded. Refresh ObjectStateManager
entries.
Here’s my controller method:
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult ClassAttendance(InstructorIndexData viewModel, FormCollection frmcol)
{
var instructorData = new InstructorIndexData();
string[] AllFstMNames = frmcol["item.Student.FirstMidName"].Split(',');
string[] AllLstNames = frmcol["item.Student.LastName"].Split(',');
string[] AllAddresses = frmcol["item.Student.Address"].Split(',');
string[] AllEnrollmentDates = frmcol["item.Student.EnrollmentDate"].Split(',');
//more of the same code…
var student = new Student();
var enrollment = new Enrollment();
for ( int i = 0; i < AllFstMNames.Count(); i++)
{
student.FirstMidName = AllFstMNames[i];
student.LastName = AllLstNames[i];
student.Address = AllAddresses[i];
student.EnrollmentDate = Convert.ToDateTime(AllEnrollmentDates[i]);
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(frmcol["item.Grade"]))
{
enrollment.Grade = Convert.ToInt32(AllGrades[i]);
}
enrollment.StudentID = Convert.ToInt32(AllStudentIds[i]);
enrollment.attendanceCode = Convert.ToInt32(AllAttendanceCodes[i]);
enrollment.classDays = AllclassDays[i];
enrollment.CourseID = Convert.ToInt32 (AllCourseIds[i]);
//update rows
}
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
db.Entry(student).State = EntityState.Modified;
db.SaveChanges();
return RedirectToAction("someView");
}
Can you help me with just being able to update values in the database?
While I was looking at the code here, my initial thought is that it doesn't seem quite right to have a for loop that updates the student and enrollment objects multiple times and then to have only one call to db.SaveChanges outside the loop. This is concerning because only the last iteration of the for loop will be applied when the data is saved to the database. (You have a comment to "update rows" at the end of the for loop - perhaps some code is missing or misplaced?)
Then, I started thinking about why it would be necessary to manually set the Entry(...).State property. Wouldn't the db automatically know that an object is modified and needs to be saved? That lead me to this question: Where is db defined? What technology stack is being used there?
Finally, after making an assumption that the db object might work something like the MS LINQ-to-SQL feature, I noticed that the the student object is newly instantiated before the for loop. This is fine for inserting new data, but if you are wanting to update existing data, I believe you need to first get a copy of the object from the database and then update the properties. This allows the db object to monitor the changes (again, assuming that it has this capability). (If this is not the case, then it leads me to wonder how the db will know which record in the database to update since you are not setting anything that appears to be a primary key, such as StudentId, on the student object in the loop.)
I have the following question:
It is easy to insert an oBject in database with a form.
Just create an object
link it to the fields in your from.
Post back to controller,
create a new datacontext and do datacontext.InsertOnSubmit(object)
.
public static void AddPage(string lang, Page page)
{
using (var db = new CardReaderDataContext())
{
page.Lang = lang;
page.URL = UrlHelper.CreateValidSeoUrl(page.Name, "-");
db.Pages.InsertOnSubmit(page);
db.SubmitChanges();
}
}
But if you want to update an object, it is a tedious job.
You do the same flow,
you get the object,
link it to your form,
post it, but THEN !!!
because it went outside your datacontext, you have to reload the object from the datacontext,
transfer all the variables and save it,
this is a little complex explained so I give an example:
To update an object that you modified in a form:
public static void Update(Page page)
{
using (var db = new CardReaderDataContext())
{
var _page = db.Pages.Where(p => p.Guid == page.Guid).Single();
_page.ModificationDate = DateTime.Now;
_page.Title = page.Title;
_page.Description = page.Description;
_page.Content = page.Content;
_page.Keywords = page.Keywords;
_page.Name = page.Name;
_page.WTLang = page.WTLang;
_page.WTSKU = page.WTSKU;
_page.WTTi = page.WTTi;
_page.WTUri = page.WTUri;
_page.URL = UrlHelper.CreateValidSeoUrl(page.Name, "-");
// _page.Order = GetMaxOrderByMenuGuid(page.MenuGuid);
db.SubmitChanges();
}
}
I don't know if it is clear, if it isn't comment me, I will edit
I think you're looking for DataContext.Attach, but you can only use that with linqtosql objects that have been serialised/deserialised.
Have a read of the answer to this question -
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums/en-US/linqprojectgeneral/thread/384a1c03-3acf-43ef-9a25-b84f93025e63/
"It's also not a good idea to even
attempt to fetch the old version. By
doing that you are in effect turning
off optimistic concurrency, so unless
you intended that this is a bad
approach. What you need to do is
round trip both the original state and
the current state of the object."