MVC + POCO + Entity Framework, Passing Object between layers - asp.net

I am trying my hands on MVC 2, ADO.NET EF and POCO. I have generated my entity classes in a separate library using POCO generator.These POCO entities are used as ViewPages (Not sure if that's the right way to design or do I need separate ViewModels classes ?)
Now, if I take case of a simple scenario where I need to add an Employee object( which is related to a Department Master), what then should be the recommended way to transfer these objects between layers.
Layered structure of the application is somewhat like this :
I have thought of various alternatives:
I have a method in the Employee Controller which is named AddEmployee() which accepts the FormCollection as parameter. Within the form collection I get posted data such as Employee Name, Age , Salary etc and the ID of the Selected Department .
1.) One way is that I can create another DTO say EmployeeDepartment DTO which will be used to map values from FormCollection as is. I can then break them at manager layer and use them to create entity objects i.e Employee Object and refer department by query similar to this:
e.Department = Department.where(i => i.deptId == empDepDto.dept_id).first()
I am not a big fan of this and feel that every time there is a relation involved I have to add a DTO and then map it to my entity class.
2.) Second is probably the worst, i.e passing each object as parameter and then couple them in manager layer.
3.) Use POCO as is, Create a Employee Object and Deparment Object at controller layer and pass the POCO object
public void AddEmployee(FormCollection formCollection)
{
Department d = new Deparmtent; d.id = ""; //based on the dropdown value
d.name="" //based on the dropdown selected text;
Employee e = new Employee; e.Name. e. sal....
e.Department = d;
EmployeeManager.AddEmployee(e);
}
But at manager layer I think , I still need to recreate the reference to the Department using LINQ which again is repetitive and doesn't seems to be a clean solution.
Are there better ways of handling this ? Looking for recommendations and best practices.

Firstly, is there any reason you're not using MVC version 3? There's no major breaking changes, so may as well upgrade?
Secondly is there a reason for using FormCollection rather than the strongly typed model-binding? Just change your views to use the strongly typed HTML helpers ( like <%: Html.TextBoxFor(m => m.Property) %>), or make sure the name attributes match the property names, and have your controller receive the type, and model binding will do the rest. There's plenty of tutorials showing this, and articles explaining it. Model binding will work with a name/value collection, like that posted as a form, or against JSON data, or you can find/write custom model binders that work against whatever wacky serialisation protocol you want.
One thing to watch though when passing the actual entity types that Entity Framework will store around, is that you have to be careful when updating existing objects, or with foreign key references to existing objects - all your objects must be attached to the right Entity Framework context. To achieve that you will often see the objects received by the controller having their properties copied to a freshly retrieved entity from a context, either manually or by an object mapper of some kind.

Make a seperate project called "BusinessObjects" or "Model" which contains your POCOs. Then use strongly typed model-binding for MVC and you'll be set.
The method signature will look something like this:
// In your Controller
public void AddEmployee(Employee newObject)
{
YourDataContext dc = new YourDataContext();
dc.Employees.Add(newObject);
dc.SaveChanges();
}

Related

Using code-first approach,I don't have an edmx file. what's the alternative?

I'm fairly new to asp.net mvc, so please bear with me.
I want to implement a calendar functionality, and all the tutorials I've looked at use database-first approach and have the edmx file (Entity Data Model)
I'm using code first and what can I do regarding the code that references this edmx file? do I reference context instead?
example:
public JsonResult GetEvents()
{
//Here MyDatabaseEntities is our entity datacontext (see Step 4)
using (MyDatabaseEntities dc = new MyDatabaseEntities())
{
var v = dc.Events.OrderBy(a => a.StartAt).ToList();
return new JsonResult { Data = v, JsonRequestBehavior = JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet };
}
}
Sorry if this question is vague or not clear.
Thank you and I'd appreciate help!
In code first, you don't need an edmx file, because everything is in your own code. The basic building blocks are:
A class that inherits from DbContext. This will be equivalent to the MyDatabaseEntities class in your sample.
A set of entity classes. They basically just need to be plain classes with auto properties corresponding to your database columns. For built in conventions to work, you also need an ID, for instance an int property named Id
A set of properties on your DbContext class of type DbSet for every type T which is an entity you would like to query against. This is the Events property in your example.
In more advanced scenarios you customize the mappings beyond what the conventions can infer automatically. This can be done with attributes on your entity classes, or via a special set of APIs that can be called on your context at startup
Go to Sql server inside your database there is a folder Database Diagram, Right click New Database Diagram and explore it.

Need help designing to ASP.NET MVC action methods

I'm just starting out learning ASP.NET MVC 3. I've been going through the Music store sample on the ASP.NET website, as well as starting to develop my own site, but I'm having some trouble understanding how I should setup my controller action methods.
On my site each user that is logged in will be able to perform standard CRUD operations on their Projects. I've set this up similar to the Music Store sample with the following action methods on a ProjectController. So far this makes sense to me.
ActionMethod View
ProjectController.Index() Lists the active users's projects
ProjectController.Details(int id) Shows details for project 123
ProjectController.Create() Shows a form to edit a new project
ProjectController.Create(FormCollection col) Adds a new project with the form contents
ProjectController.Edit() Shows a form to edit a new project
ProjectController.Edit(int id, FormCollection col) Adds a new project with the form contents
ProjectController.Deiete(int id) Shows a delete confirmation form
ProjectController.Delete(int id, FormCollection col) Deletes a project with the provided id.
In addition, users will be able to add Items to each project. Items can not exist on their own and must be associated to a project when being created. What I'm having trouble understanding is how to pass along the reference to the project an Item should be created in. For example in my item controller I have a pair of Create() action methods similar to the controller above.
ItemController.Create() Shows a form to create a new item
ItemController.Create(FormCollection col) Creates a new item with the details from the form.
Yet I don't understand how the first Create() method passes a reference to the project which the new Item should be created in since the View() helper method can only accept one object parameter. Should I just add a reference to a project to a property of the ViewBag? I'm new to dynamic types as well and the ViewBag just seems magic to me at the point. So I'm a little hesitant to use it. I've also always thought strongly typed design is better. So should I create a separate "NewItemData" model object that contains a reference to a new Item as well as the project it is being added to?
Once the form knows which project it is adding an item to how should it pass this information back when submitted? Should there be a hidden "ProjectID" field in the form? Or should the form POST back to a URL with the project id in the query string?
www.mysite.com/Item/Create?ProjectID=1234
Finally, I also want to be able to list the items that are added to each project. Should this be part of the ItemController or the ProjectController. For simplicities sake I'm sticking with the default Controller\Action[ID] URL routing. A few of my ideas are listed below. I'm leaning towards the last option, but would really like to hear what others with more experience with this stuff think.
Action Method URL
ItemController.Index(int ProjectID) \Item?ProjectID=1234
ItemController.List(int id) \Item\List\1234
ProjectController.Items(int id) \Project\Items\1234
To answer your last question, it depends. Do Items in your model exist independently of a project? If the answer is no, then I would tend to do
ProjectController.AddItem(int id)
ProjectController.Items(int id)
where id represents the projectID.
The name of the parameters you use in the action signature directly correspond to values from the routedata and request values. {controller}/{action}/{id} is a pattern that uses the braced names as keys in the route dictionary. If you wanted you could change the routes to be {controller}/{action}/{projectid} for that action and your method signature could be the (int projectid) signature.
I don't recommend you do this just to get awesome signatures. Use comments instead if you think people will get confused.
Without changing the route pattern, if you would prefer your urls to be /project/items?projectid=3 than /project/items/3 then the action would be this:
ProjectController.Items(int projectId)
I like the prettier urls, so i'd be more apt to use the id version. That being said, if Items do not exist independently of the Project object, I would be be more likely to do this. However, if you are going to have a TON of different actions that can be performed on an Item, it would make sense to separate them into ItemController and ProjectController.
It comes down, to a large extent, about what makes sense for your application and how many actions you think a controller should have on it.
In this case you'd create a hidden field with the name=projectId and then in your Create controller have an action method.
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult Create( int projectId, FormCollection postData )
Usually you'd also use a strongly typed viewmodel so instead the FormCollection parameter use:
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult Create( int projectId, Item or ItemViewModel postData )
And as long as the name attributes match the properties in Item or ItemViewModel MVC's ModelBinder will take care of hydrating those values.

ADO.Net EF, Inheritance Table shows, but not the model

I have created a Entity named MediaItem which is Abstract and Game inherits form it. I create the database automatically and I get a table MediaItems and MediaItems_Game.
The issue is when I do the following in my ASP.Net Controller:
private Models.DBContainer dataModel = new DBContainer();
dataModel. ---> Intellisense shows me MediaItem but I can find no way to either navigate to or use MediaItems_Game, how can I solve this? i.e. How can I grab a list of 'Games' with some 'WHERE' constraints on another table (not pictured).
Any info is appreciated, thanks.
This is how inheritance in EF works. You have only single set of parent type. If you want to get just games you will use OfType method:
var games = dataModel.MediaItems.OfType<Game>().ToList();

ASP.NET EntityFramework 4 data context issues

I'm working on a site and there are two projects in the solution a business logic project and the website project. I understand that I want to keep the entity context out of the web project and only use the business objects the framework creates but I can't figure out how to save a modified object this way.
Let's say my entity model created this class:
public class Person //Person entity
{
Int32 Id {get;set;}
String Name {get;set;}
Address Address {get;set;} //Address entity
}
And I created this class to get a specific person:
public static class PersonController
{
public static Person GetById(int id)
{
using (Entities context = new Entities())
{
return context.Persons.FirstOrDefault(x => x.Id == id);
}
}
}
This allows me to get a person without a context by calling PersonController.GetById(1); and I can change the persons properties after I get them but I can't figure out how to save the modified information back to the database. Ideally I would like to partial class Person and add a .Save() method which would handle creating a context adding the person to it and saving the changes. But when I tried this a while ago there were all kinds of issues with it still being attached to the old context and even if I detatch it and attatch it to a new context it gets attached as EntityState.Unchanged, if I remember right, so when I call context.SaveChages() after attaching it nothing actually gets updated.
I guess I have two questions:
1) Am I going about this in a good way/is there a better way? If I'm doing this in a really terrible way I would appreciate some psudo-code to point me in the right direction; a link to a post explaining how to go about this type of thing would work just as well.
2) Can someone provide some psudo-code for a save method? The save method would also need to handle if an address was attached or removed.
There are many ways to handle Entity Framework as a persistence layer.
For one, it looks like you're not using pure POCOs. That is, you let EF generate the classes for your (in the EDMX.designer.cs file).
Nothing wrong with that, but it does inhibit a clean separation of concerns (especially when it comes to unit testing).
Have you considering implementing the Repository pattern to encapsulate your EF logic? This would be a good way to isolate the logic from your UI.
In terms of Save - this is where it gets difficult. You're right, most people use partial classes. Generally, you would have a base class which exposes a virtual "Save" method, which the partial classes can then override.
I personally don't like this pattern - i believe POCOs should not care about persistence, or the underlying infrastructure. Therefore I like to use pure POCOs (no code gen), Repository pattern and Unit of Work.
The Unit of Work handles the context opening/saving/closing for you.
This is how (my) Unit of Work does the magic. Consider this some code in your "Web" project:
var uOw = new UnitOfWork(); // this is class i created, implementing the UOW pattern
var person = repository.Find(10); // find's a "Person" entity (pure POCO), with id 10.
person.Name = "Scott";
uOw.Commit();
Or adding a new Person:
var uOw = new UnitOfWork();
var newPerson = new Person { Name = "Bob" };
repository.Add(newPerson);
uOw.Commit();
How nice is that? :)
Line 1 creates a new sql context for you.
Line 2 uses that same context to retrieve a single "Person" object, which is a hand-coded POCO (not generated by EF).
Line 3 changes the name of the Person (pure POCO setter).
Line 4 Saves the changes to the data context, and closes the context.
Now, there is a LOT more to these patterns than that, so I suggest you read up on these patterns to see if it suits you.
My repository is also implemented with Generics, so I can re-use this interface for all business entity persistence.
Also take a look at some of the other questions I have asked on Stack Overflow - and you can see how I've implemented these patterns.
Not sure if this is the "answer" you're looking for, but thought I'd give you some alternative options.

ASP.NET MVC 2 LINQ-to-SQL generated classes and Model Validation

I just want to make sure I understand correctly the best practices for ASP.NET MVC2 with LINQ-TO-SQL.
Please correct me if I am wrong at any of the following points:
LINQ TO SQL generates classes for
you, based on your tables
The generated classes are Models
Those are the models we are supposed to use in the Views
If we want to add validation to the models, we extend the partial class and set data
annotations. Something like this.
Generally my question is about the data validation. What I used to do is create a "shadow" Model for each of my LINQ-to-SQL generated classes and put the data validation there. Then, in the controllers I was creating an instance of the "shadow" model and also retrieve data (using Repository pattern). Mapped from the entity to the shadow model and passed it to the view. So, something like that (in the Controller):
// Car is class generated by LINQ-to-SQL, based on the Car table
// Use repository class to retrieve the data (Car)
Car car = myDatabaseRepository.GetCar(1);
// CarModel is my 'shadow' model, which has all the data validation.
// For example, it makes sure Year is before 2010 (let's say).
CarModel carModel = new CarModel();
carModel.Year = car.Year;
carModel.Make = car.Make;
carModel.Model = car.Model;
return View(carModel);
This is wrong, right (no pun intended)? It should have been only:
// Car should have been extended (as partial) and data annotation
// should have been in the extended class, rather than a whole separate
// model class.
Car car = myDatabaseRepository.GetCar(1);
return View(car);
Right?
I think it is a best practice to have a ViewModel (what you termed "shadow" model) that is used to pass only relevant data model information to a view and incorporating UI validation metadata. You can also use a library such as AutoMapper to copy over the values, rather than coding each one by hand.
A Table = Model approach can work in very simple scenarios (few tables + simple UI exactly matching database schema). In order to save yourself a lot of pain later on it is recommended to use ViewModels.

Resources