I have a few properties that I don't have a direct mapping in the database for, so I'm using the convention of having another variable that is mapped to the database, and a public variable that will be used to do all of my actual work. The common one is [mapping a boolean property to a char column][1], but I also have a StatusID property whose C# enum is different based on the derived type.
My public property has the [NotMapped] attribute on it, and my internal property has the [Column] attribute. I think there's something that because the public property isn't mapped, it's keeping the other property from being mapped as well.
In my project, I start with an abstract base Message class:
[Table("tblMessage")]
public abstract class Message {
[Column("msgIsSample")]
[Required]
internal string dbIsSample { get; set; }
[Column("msgStatusID")]
internal int? dbStatusId { get; set; }
[NotMapped]
public bool IsSample {
get {
return dbIsSample.ToUpper() == "Y";
}
set {
dbIsSample = value ? "Y" : "N";
}
}
public Message() {
this.IsSample = false;
this.dbStatusId = null;
}
}
Right now I only have a single class implementing the base class, Request:
public class Request : Message {
[NotMapped]
public int Status {
get {
return this.dbStatusId.HasValue ? this.dbStatusId.Value : 1;
}
set {
this.dbStatusId = value;
}
}
public Request()
: base() {
this.Status = 1;
}
}
Here is my context:
public class MyContext : DbContext {
public DbSet<Message> Messages { get; set; }
static MyContext() {
Database.SetInitializer<MyContext>(null);
}
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder) {
modelBuilder.Entity<Message>()
.Map<Request>(m => m.Requires("msgTypeID").HasValue(1));
}
}
Is this something that anyone else has run across? I haven't been able to find anything about why this isn't working, even though this looks like the accepted convention until the EF team adds additional custom mapping. Someone else has to have run across this issue.
When I try to execute this code, I get a DbUpdateException saying that it can't insert a NULL into column "msgIsSample" due to my having set that in the table creation script. This doesn't make any sense because the msgIsSample is defaulted to have a "N".
Instead of making it internal, make it protected internal.
At runtime, EF will subclass your entity dynamically. These extended classes are called dynamic proxies.
EF cannot set your property because it does not have access. To give EF access to your property, it must have either public or protected access. You can still have internal properties, but give subclasses access by adding the protected modifier.
[Table("tblMessage")]
public abstract class Message {
[Column("msgIsSample")]
[Required]
public string dbIsSample { get; protected internal set; }
[Column("msgStatusID")]
public int? dbStatusId { get; protected internal set; }
Related
When I add a type to AutoQuery, with:
[Route("/templates")]
public class SearchTemplates : QueryDb<Template>
{
public int? Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
then I can query this object by Id or Name (or whatever other attributes I would add, that the POCO Template has). However it always returns list of items.
It's very useful to be able to GET a single item (not a search result).
This is how I do it:
[Route("/template/{Id}","GET")]
public class SingleTemplate : IReturn<Template>
{
public int Id { get; set; }
}
public Template Get(SingleTemplate request)
{
return Db.LoadSingleById<Template>(request.Id);
}
With all the new AutoQuery and AutoCRUD, it seems to me that the "return a single item by its URL" could also be automatic?
No, All AutoQuery QueryDb<T> services return the same fixed QueryResponse Response DTO as per its Service Contract, i.e:
public abstract class QueryDb<T>
: QueryBase, IQueryDb<T>, IReturn<QueryResponse<T>> { }
public abstract class QueryDb<From, Into>
: QueryBase, IQueryDb<From, Into>, IReturn<QueryResponse<Into>> { }
public class QueryResponse<T> : IQueryResponse
{
public virtual int Offset { get; set; }
public virtual int Total { get; set; }
public virtual List<T> Results { get; set; }
public virtual Dictionary<string, string> Meta { get; set; }
public virtual ResponseStatus ResponseStatus { get; set; }
}
A single result would still populate the Results property, so the JSON wire format would look like:
{ "results":[ {/*Template*/} ] }
You could create your own Custom AutoQuery Implementation that utilizes AutoQuery's IAutoQueryDb API to return your own custom populated DTO but then your Request DTO should NOT inherit from QueryDb<T> as not returning a QueryResponse<T> would break the explicit Service contract of the Request DTO (and all clients expecting it), i.e. you would instead just create a normal ServiceStack Service returning your own custom Response Type.
I am using automapper to map some objects between the database and another representation.
The entity looks something like
public class MyEntity {
public int Id { get; set; }
public Guid RowId { get; set; }
}
public class MyObject {
public Guid Id { get; set; }
}
As you can see, the names and types are unaligned.
Since I got many Entities and Objects, I'd rather not CreateMap<A, B>().ForMember(d => d.Id, mex => mex.MapFrom(s => s.RowId));.
To not having to do the above Convention:
AddMemberConfiguration()
.AddMember<NameSplitMember>()
.AddName<ReplaceName>(_ => _.AddReplace("RowId", "Id"));
This does not what I suspected it to do and I was not able to figure out, how to use the ReplaceName Convention.
So I'd like to hear ideas about how to map that types.
MyEntity and MyObject both are base types, so I could also use that.
What I'm trying to archieve in pseudo-code:
if(source is MyEntity && target is MyObject)
{
target.Id = source.RowId;
}
ForAllMembers
On recommendation of #lucian-bargaoanu I tried looking into ForAllMembers.
I did the following in the MapperProfile:
public class MapperProfile : Profile {
public MapperProfile() {
ForAllMaps(MapEntityBaseId);
}
protected void MapEntityBaseId(TypeMap map, IMappingExpression mex)
{
if (!map.SourceType.IsSubclassOf(typeof(EntityBase)))
return;
if (!map.DestinationType.IsSubclassOf(typeof(MyObject)))
return;
mex.ForMember("Id", opt => opt.MapFrom("RowId"));
}
}
also the debugger hints me, that ForAllMember is executed as expected, it still fails the mapping.
I created a GIST for the ForAllMembers: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/511a1b69b795aa2bc7e7cd261fcb98b1
I've created a QueryBase class in order to support Paging and Sorting when needed.
public class QueryBase
{
public string Sort { get; set; }
public int PageNumber { get; set; }
public int PageSize { get; set; }
}
If a class supports these features, it'll simply extend it like this:
public class Cars: QueryBase, IReturn<CarsResponse>
{
}
public class CarsResponse : IHasResponseStatus
{
public List<Car> Cars { get; set; }
public ResponseStatus ResponseStatus { get; set; }
}
Then in order to fill QueryBase from querystring I've created a RequestFilterAttribute that can be used when needed:
public class QueryRequestFilterAttribute : Attribute, IHasRequestFilter
{
#region IHasRequestFilter Members
public IHasRequestFilter Copy()
{
return this;
}
public int Priority
{
get { return -100; }
}
public void RequestFilter(IHttpRequest req, IHttpResponse res, object requestDto)
{
var request = requestDto as QueryBase;
if (request == null) { return; }
request.PageNumber = req.QueryString["pageNumber"].IsEmpty() ? 1 : int.Parse(req.QueryString["pageNumber"]);
request.PageSize = req.QueryString["pageSize"].IsEmpty() ? 15 : int.Parse(req.QueryString["pageSize"]);
request.Sort = req.QueryString["sort"].IsNullOrEmpty() ? "id" : req.QueryString["sort"];
}
#endregion
}
Everything is working properly, but my goal now is to enable Validation in order to define some basic rules like maxpagesize or minpagenumber.
A very basic implementation is:
public class QueryBaseValidator : AbstractValidator<QueryBase>
{
public QueryBaseValidator()
{
RuleFor(query => query.PageSize).LessThanOrEqualTo(100).GreaterThan(0);
}
}
In this way validator filter is not able to find the validator above in its cache, because it searches for Cars instead of QueryBase (line 11 ValidationFilter.cs):
ValidatorCache.GetValidator(req, requestDto.GetType());
What is the best solution for this problem in order to avoid writing same validation logic in each subclass?
I found a solution but I don't know if it's the best one: using a validator for each class implementing QueryBase.
QueryBaseValidator modified as follows:
public class QueryBaseValidator<T> : AbstractValidator<T> where T : QueryBase
{
public QueryBaseValidator()
{
RuleFor(query => query.PageSize).LessThanOrEqualTo(100).GreaterThan(0);
}
}
Additional validator created for subclass Cars
public class CarsValidator : QueryBaseValidator<Cars>
{
}
In this way everything works and I've now a basic implementation of generic paging, sorting and very soon query with ServiceStack.
I just start to learn REST and ServiceStack and there's something about Route that I just can't quite understand. For example if we take the very basic HelloWorld example from GitHub tutorial and re-write it to return collection of User objects. Here is example:
public User
{
public string Name;
public string Address;
public int Age;
}
// Hello - request object without [Route] attribute
public class Hello
{
public string Name { get; set; }
}
public class HelloResponse
{
public IEnumerable<User> Result {get;set;}
}
public class HelloService : Service
{
public object Any(Hello request)
{
return new HelloResponse { // Collection of User object };
}
}
now everything working right and no problems here. But now I want to add another routing url like: /Hello/{name}/Address
Actually this call (GET) to this url will return a single User selected by Age parameter. How I can do this ? Should I add another Service ? And if the url will be:
/Hello/{name}/{age}/Address
It seems I don't understand something.....
See this earlier answer for details about Routing in ServiceStack. The Smart Routing section in ServiceStack's New API explains further options and different precedence.
There are a few problems with your example. First ServiceStack text serializers only support public properties so you need to change your User Model to use public properties instead of fields, e.g:
public User
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Address { get; set; }
public int Age { get; set; }
}
Next, Interfaces on DTOs are a bad idea as there's no good reason for it. They're still supported but you can end up with undesirable results. Use a concrete collection like a List<T> which provides more utility, e.g:
public class HelloResponse
{
public List<User> Results { get; set; }
}
Also the routes should match the property names on your DTO exactly, they are case-insensitive when matching against the Request Path, but they need to map to an exact property name, e.g:
/Hello/{Name}/{Age}/Address
Here is a sample of what I am trying to accomplish:
public class BaseClass<T>
{
public static T GetByID(int ID)
{
// Need database name here that is determined at design time in the derived class.
var databaseName = "";
// do some stuff involving database name that gets me object by ID here.
return default(T);
}
}
public class DerivedClass : BaseClass<DerivedClass>
{
private string DatabaseName { get; set; }
}
Basically, how would I access the derived "DatabaseName" in the base class static GetByID method?
EDIT: After I posted this, I tried one more thing. I played with attributes earlier, and failed, but I think my brain was mushy. Just tried again and ran a test, and it is working. Here is the updated sample.
public class BaseClass<T>
{
public static T GetByID(int ID)
{
// Need database name here that is determined at design time in the derived class.
var databaseName = ((DatabaseAttribute)typeof(T).GetCustomAttributes(typeof(DatabaseAttribute), true).First()).DatabaseName;
// do some stuff involving database name that gets me object by ID here.
return default(T);
}
}
[Database("MyDatabase")]
public class DerivedClass : BaseClass<DerivedClass>
{
}
public class DatabaseAttribute : Attribute
{
public DatabaseAttribute(string databaseName)
{
DatabaseName = databaseName;
}
public string DatabaseName { get; set; }
}
Base class to derived class is a one-way inheritance: The base class has no knowledge of the existance of a derived class, and so it can't access it.
In addition to that you will have a hard time accessing a non-static property from a static method.
I know you've already answered your own question, but some improvements....
Add a where clause to guarantee inheritance, it means any static methods can make use of inherited methods. You might also want to add the new() clause if you wish to be able to create instances of the inherited class.
public class BaseClass<T> : where T : BaseClass<T>
{
static readonly string databaseName;
static BaseClass() {
// Setup database name once per type of T by putting the initialization in
// the static constructor
databaseName = typeof(T).GetCustomAttributes(typeof(DatabaseAttribute),true)
.OfType<DatabaseAttribute>()
.Select(x => x.Name)
.FirstOrDefault();
}
public static T GetByID(int ID)
{
// Database name will be in the static field databaseName, which is unique
// to each type of T
// do some stuff involving database name that gets me object by ID here.
return default(T);
}
}
[Database("MyDatabase")]
public class DerivedClass : BaseClass<DerivedClass>
{
}
public class DatabaseAttribute : Attribute
{
public DatabaseAttribute(string databaseName)
{
DatabaseName = databaseName;
}
public string DatabaseName { get; set; }
}