I have a .NET6 API project that allows users to fetch resources from a database (SQL Server), and update them on a web client, and submit the updated resource back for saving to db. I need to notify users if another user has already updated the same resource during editing. I tried using EF IsRowVersion property for this concurrency check.
I noticed that "normal" update procedure (just getting the entity, changing properties and saving) does not respect the RowVersion expected behavior. But if I get the entity using AsNoTracking and use the db.Update method, the concurrency check works as expected. What could be the reason, and is the db.Update the only way to force the RowVersion check? That method has the downside that it tries to update every property, not just those that have changed. Simplified and runnable console app example below:
using Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore;
Guid guid;
using (PeopleContext db = new())
{
Person p = new() { Name = "EF", Age = 30 };
db.Database.EnsureDeleted();
db.Database.EnsureCreated();
db.People.Add(p);
await db.SaveChangesAsync();
guid = p.Id;
}
using (PeopleContext db = new())
{
Person p = await db.People.FirstAsync(x => x.Id == guid);
p.Name = "FE";
p.RowVersion = Convert.FromBase64String("AAAAAADDC9I=");
await db.SaveChangesAsync(); // Does not throw even though RowVersion is incorrect
}
using (PeopleContext db = new())
{
Person p = await db.People.AsNoTracking().FirstAsync(x => x.Id == guid);
p.Name = "EFFE";
p.RowVersion = Convert.FromBase64String("AAAAAAGGC9I=");
db.People.Update(p);
await db.SaveChangesAsync(); // Throws DbUpdateConcurrencyException as expected, but updates all properties
}
public class Person
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; } = string.Empty;
public int Age { get; set; }
public byte[] RowVersion { get; set; } = Array.Empty<byte>();
}
public class PeopleContext : DbContext
{
public PeopleContext(){}
public DbSet<Person> People => Set<Person>();
protected override void OnConfiguring(DbContextOptionsBuilder optionsBuilder)
{
optionsBuilder.UseSqlServer(#"Data Source=(localdb)\MSSQLLocalDB;Initial Catalog=EFRowVersionDb;Integrated Security=True;");
optionsBuilder.LogTo(Console.WriteLine, Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.LogLevel.Information);
optionsBuilder.EnableSensitiveDataLogging();
}
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Person>(entity =>
{
entity.Property(e => e.RowVersion)
.IsRequired()
.IsRowVersion();
});
}
}
I solved the problem by overriding the SaveChangesAsync method like this:
public override Task<int> SaveChangesAsync(bool acceptAllChangesOnSuccess, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default)
{
foreach (var item in ChangeTracker.Entries().Where(x=>x.State == EntityState.Modified))
{
item.OriginalValues["RowVersion"] = item.CurrentValues["RowVersion"];
}
return base.SaveChangesAsync(acceptAllChangesOnSuccess, cancellationToken);
}
I override that signature method cause the one without boolean calls that method. Same thing on sync version.
I am working on an API and when I started adding new data. I received this error. It was working when I manually add the ID every input but now I got this error and after adding some solutions from here its still not working.
Error:
Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.DbUpdateConcurrencyException: Database operation expected to affect 1 row(s) but actually affected 0 row(s).
Data may have been modified or deleted since entities were loaded. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=527962 for information on understanding and handling optimistic concurrency exceptions.
Code for insert:
public bool Insert(string UserName, SendInventoryModel sendInventoryModel)
{
using (DatabaseContext context = new DatabaseContext())
{
bool flag = false;
// Create new
InventoryEntity inventoryEntity = new InventoryEntity
{
UserName = sendInventoryModel.UserName,
Item = sendInventoryModel.Item ,
};
context.Table.Add(inventoryEntity);
context.SaveChanges();
// Check
var model = CheckUserNameID(UserName, sendInventoryModel.Item);
var data = context.Table.Find(model.Id);
if (null != data)
{
flag = true;
}
return flag;
}
}
SendInventoryModel:
public class SendSiteMailModel
{
[Required]
public string UserName { get; set; }
[Required]
public string Item{ get; set; }
}
InventoryController:
[HttpPost("{username}")]
[Authorize]
public JObject Post([Required] string UserName, [FromBody] SendInventoryModel sendInventoryModel)
{
ResponseModel x = new ResponseModel();
try
{
InventoryRepository InventoryRepository = new InventoryRepository();
bool isSuccess = InventoryRepository.Insert(UserName, sendInventoryModel);
}
catch (Exception error)
{
// if not successful
}
return Json(x);
}
I already added [DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)] in my InventoryEntity and InventoryModel.
InventoryEntity:
[Key]
DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
public int Id { get; set; }
InventoryModel:
[DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)]
public int Id { get; set; }
I also added the below code in my DBContext.cs:
public virtual DbSet<OtherTableEntity> Table{ get; set; }
public virtual DbSet<InventoryEntity> Table{ get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<OtherTableEntity>();
modelBuilder.Entity<InventoryEntity>().Property(x => x.Id).ValueGeneratedOnAdd();
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
partial void OnModelCreatingPartial(ModelBuilder modelBuilder);
Add finally my table design: Inventory ID:
(Is Identity) = Yes
Identity Increment = 1
Identity Seed = 1
Note that there is no Primary Key in the Inventory table. And its an old table with existing data. The current database was migrated from membership to identity.
After all the things that I have added the context.SaveChanges(); in the insert method still does not work. Any ideas or suggestion on how to fix this problem?
Note: I've changed the table entity names and models per Asherguru suggestion since its kinda confusing and generic.
Are your TableEntity and Table in database same table names?
Why different names - TableEntity and Table?
Try to add [Table("YourTableNameInDatabase")] in TableEntity class. Then EF can find actual table in database and insert into this table.
[Table("YourTableNameInDatabase")]
public partial class TableEntity
{
public int Id { get; set; }
}
It would be less confusing if you show actual table names with some necessary screenshots.
I am building a NET Core MVC app that consumes an existing MS SQL database. Primary keys and foreign keys are already established and working correctly at the database level.
I followed the example in this article and used package manager console to reverse engineer the models and database context from the database. This seemed to work well. It resulted in all models being added to my app's Models folder including a robust database context class. The problem I'm having is that relational information about these entities isn't being populated at runtime. I'm getting nulls for related entities for which foreign keys are established both in the database and in the fluent API code generated by the scaffolding process.
I have two tables, Mode and Submode, that are related via foreign key.
Scaffolding generated these two classes for the above two tables:
public partial class Submode
{
public Submode()
{
Contact = new HashSet<Contact>();
}
public int Id { get; set; }
public int ModeId { get; set; }
public string Code { get; set; }
public bool Visible { get; set; }
public bool IsDefault { get; set; }
public Mode Mode { get; set; }
public ICollection<Contact> Contact { get; set; }
}
public partial class Mode
{
public Mode()
{
Contact = new HashSet<Contact>();
Submode = new HashSet<Submode>();
}
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Code { get; set; }
public bool Visible { get; set; }
public bool IsDefault { get; set; }
public ICollection<Contact> Contact { get; set; }
public ICollection<Submode> Submode { get; set; }
}
Scaffolding also generated this fluent API snippet in the database context:
modelBuilder.Entity<Submode>(entity =>
{
entity.HasIndex(e => e.Code)
.HasName("UQ__Submode__A25C5AA75D2A9AE7")
.IsUnique();
entity.Property(e => e.Code)
.IsRequired()
.HasMaxLength(100)
.IsUnicode(false);
entity.HasOne(d => d.Mode)
.WithMany(p => p.Submode)
.HasForeignKey(d => d.ModeId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.ClientSetNull)
.HasConstraintName("FK_Submode_ModeId");
});
Every example I've read on setting foreign keys with fluent API show a similar pattern to the above snippets. But Mode comes back null for Submode.
Null at runtime
And I get a null reference exception in the returned view because I'm trying to display properties of the related Mode object. Am I missing some configuration or is there a problem with the scaffolded code?
UDPATE - as requested, here's the implementation that's fetching data from the database context.
public class SQLSubModeData : ISubModeData
{
private w4lkrContext _context;
public SQLSubModeData(w4lkrContext context)
{
_context = context;
}
public IQueryable<Submode> Get()
{
return _context.Submode.OrderBy(p => p.Id);
}
public Submode Get(int id)
{
return _context.Submode.FirstOrDefault(p => p.Id == id);
}
}
UPDATE (SOLVED) - Enabling lazy loading fixed the problem. Three steps got me there:
Installed Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Proxies(2.1.2) via NuGet
Updated Startup.cs -> AddDbContext() method, as follows:
services.AddDbContext(options => options.UseLazyLoadingProxies().UseSqlServer(_configuration.GetConnectionString("W4LKR")));
Made all navigation properties virtual. This had to be done on every model in the app, not just the one being called in my example above. Errors are thrown if even one is left out.
But Mode comes back null for Submode.
Since your Navigation Properties aren't declared as virtual, you have disabled Lazy Loading, so EF will only populate your Navigation Properties if you do Eager Loading, or Explicit Loading.
See Loading Related Data
I've been wrestling with this for a while and can't quite figure out what's happening. I have a Card entity which contains Sides (usually 2) - and both Cards and Sides have a Stage. I'm using EF Codefirst migrations and the migrations are failing with this error:
Introducing FOREIGN KEY constraint 'FK_dbo.Sides_dbo.Cards_CardId' on
table 'Sides' may cause cycles or multiple cascade paths. Specify ON
DELETE NO ACTION or ON UPDATE NO ACTION, or modify other FOREIGN KEY
constraints.
Here's my Card entity:
public class Card
{
public Card()
{
Sides = new Collection<Side>();
Stage = Stage.ONE;
}
[Key]
[Required]
public virtual int CardId { get; set; }
[Required]
public virtual Stage Stage { get; set; }
[Required]
[ForeignKey("CardId")]
public virtual ICollection<Side> Sides { get; set; }
}
Here's my Side entity:
public class Side
{
public Side()
{
Stage = Stage.ONE;
}
[Key]
[Required]
public virtual int SideId { get; set; }
[Required]
public virtual Stage Stage { get; set; }
[Required]
public int CardId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("CardId")]
public virtual Card Card { get; set; }
}
And here's my Stage entity:
public class Stage
{
// Zero
public static readonly Stage ONE = new Stage(new TimeSpan(0, 0, 0), "ONE");
// Ten seconds
public static readonly Stage TWO = new Stage(new TimeSpan(0, 0, 10), "TWO");
public static IEnumerable<Stage> Values
{
get
{
yield return ONE;
yield return TWO;
}
}
public int StageId { get; set; }
private readonly TimeSpan span;
public string Title { get; set; }
Stage(TimeSpan span, string title)
{
this.span = span;
this.Title = title;
}
public TimeSpan Span { get { return span; } }
}
What's odd is that if I add the following to my Stage class:
public int? SideId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("SideId")]
public virtual Side Side { get; set; }
The migration runs successfully. If I open up SSMS and look at the tables, I can see that Stage_StageId has been added to Cards (as expected/desired), however Sides contains no reference to Stage (not expected).
If I then add
[Required]
[ForeignKey("StageId")]
public virtual Stage Stage { get; set; }
public int StageId { get; set; }
To my Side class, I see StageId column added to my Side table.
This is working, but now throughout my application, any reference to Stage contains a SideId, which is in some cases totally irrelevant. I'd like to just give my Card and Side entities a Stage property based on the above Stage class without polluting the stage class with reference properties if possible... what am I doing wrong?
Because Stage is required, all one-to-many relationships where Stage is involved will have cascading delete enabled by default. It means, if you delete a Stage entity
the delete will cascade directly to Side
the delete will cascade directly to Card and because Card and Side have a required one-to-many relationship with cascading delete enabled by default again it will then cascade from Card to Side
So, you have two cascading delete paths from Stage to Side - which causes the exception.
You must either make the Stage optional in at least one of the entities (i.e. remove the [Required] attribute from the Stage properties) or disable cascading delete with Fluent API (not possible with data annotations):
modelBuilder.Entity<Card>()
.HasRequired(c => c.Stage)
.WithMany()
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
modelBuilder.Entity<Side>()
.HasRequired(s => s.Stage)
.WithMany()
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
I had a table that had a circular relationship with others and I was getting the same error. Turns out it is about the foreign key which was not nullable. If the key is not nullable the related object must be deleted, and circular relations don't allow that. So use nullable foreign key.
[ForeignKey("StageId")]
public virtual Stage Stage { get; set; }
public int? StageId { get; set; }
Anybody wondering how to do it in EF core:
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
foreach (var relationship in modelBuilder.Model.GetEntityTypes().SelectMany(e => e.GetForeignKeys()))
{
relationship.DeleteBehavior = DeleteBehavior.Restrict;
}
..... rest of the code.....
I was getting this error for lots of entities when I was migrating down from an EF7 model to an EF6 version. I didn't want to have to go through each entity one at a time, so I used:
builder.Conventions.Remove<ManyToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
builder.Conventions.Remove<OneToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
You can set cascadeDelete to false or true (in your migration Up() method). Depends upon your requirement.
AddForeignKey("dbo.Stories", "StatusId", "dbo.Status", "StatusID", cascadeDelete: false);
In .NET Core I changed the onDelete option to ReferencialAction.NoAction
constraints: table =>
{
table.PrimaryKey("PK_Schedule", x => x.Id);
table.ForeignKey(
name: "FK_Schedule_Teams_HomeId",
column: x => x.HomeId,
principalTable: "Teams",
principalColumn: "Id",
onDelete: ReferentialAction.NoAction);
table.ForeignKey(
name: "FK_Schedule_Teams_VisitorId",
column: x => x.VisitorId,
principalTable: "Teams",
principalColumn: "Id",
onDelete: ReferentialAction.NoAction);
});
I had this issue also, I solved it instantly with this answer from a similar thread
In my case, I didn't want to delete the dependent record on key deletion. If this is the case in your situation just simply change the Boolean value in the migration to false:
AddForeignKey("dbo.Stories", "StatusId", "dbo.Status", "StatusID", cascadeDelete: false);
Chances are, if you are creating relationships which throw this compiler error but DO want to maintain cascade delete; you have an issue with your relationships.
I fixed this. When you add the migration, in the Up() method there will be a line like this:
.ForeignKey("dbo.Members", t => t.MemberId, cascadeDelete:True)
If you just delete the cascadeDelete from the end it will work.
Just for documentation purpose, to someone that comes on the future, this thing can be solved as simple as this, and with this method, you could do a method that disabled one time, and you could access your method normally
Add this method to the context database class:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder) {
modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<OneToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
}
In .NET Core I played with all upper answers - but without any success.
I made changes a lot in DB structure and every time added new migration attempting to update-database, but received the same error.
Then I started to remove-migration one by one until Package Manager Console threw me exception:
The migration '20170827183131_***' has already been applied to the database
After that, I added new migration (add-migration) and update-database successfully
So my suggestion would be: clear out all your temp migrations, until your current DB state.
public partial class recommended_books : DbMigration
{
public override void Up()
{
CreateTable(
"dbo.RecommendedBook",
c => new
{
RecommendedBookID = c.Int(nullable: false, identity: true),
CourseID = c.Int(nullable: false),
DepartmentID = c.Int(nullable: false),
Title = c.String(),
Author = c.String(),
PublicationDate = c.DateTime(nullable: false),
})
.PrimaryKey(t => t.RecommendedBookID)
.ForeignKey("dbo.Course", t => t.CourseID, cascadeDelete: false) // was true on migration
.ForeignKey("dbo.Department", t => t.DepartmentID, cascadeDelete: false) // was true on migration
.Index(t => t.CourseID)
.Index(t => t.DepartmentID);
}
public override void Down()
{
DropForeignKey("dbo.RecommendedBook", "DepartmentID", "dbo.Department");
DropForeignKey("dbo.RecommendedBook", "CourseID", "dbo.Course");
DropIndex("dbo.RecommendedBook", new[] { "DepartmentID" });
DropIndex("dbo.RecommendedBook", new[] { "CourseID" });
DropTable("dbo.RecommendedBook");
}
}
When your migration fails you are given a couple of options:
'Introducing FOREIGN KEY constraint 'FK_dbo.RecommendedBook_dbo.Department_DepartmentID' on table 'RecommendedBook' may cause cycles or multiple cascade paths. Specify ON DELETE NO ACTION or ON UPDATE NO ACTION, or modify other FOREIGN KEY constraints.
Could not create constraint or index. See previous errors.'
Here is an example of using the 'modify other FOREIGN KEY constraints' by setting 'cascadeDelete' to false in the migration file and then run 'update-database'.
Make your Foreign key attributes nullable. That will work.
This sounds weird and I don't know why, but in my case that was happening because my ConnectionString was using "." in "data source" attribute. Once I changed it to "localhost" it workded like a charm. No other change was needed.
The existing answers are great I just wanted to add that I ran into this error because of a different reason. I wanted to create an Initial EF migration on an existing DB but I didn't use the -IgnoreChanges flag and applied the Update-Database command on an empty Database (also on the existing fails).
Instead I had to run this command when the current db structure is the current one:
Add-Migration Initial -IgnoreChanges
There is likely a real problem in the db structure but save the world one step at a time...
In .NET 5 < and .NET Core 2.0 < you can use .OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict) in OnModelCreating like #Nexus23 answer but you do not need to disable cascade for every model.
Example with join entity type configuration many-to-many:
internal class MyContext : DbContext
{
public MyContext(DbContextOptions<MyContext> options)
: base(options)
{
}
public DbSet<Post> Posts { get; set; }
public DbSet<Tag> Tags { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Post>()
.HasMany(p => p.Tags)
.WithMany(p => p.Posts)
.UsingEntity<PostTag>(
j => j
.HasOne(pt => pt.Tag)
.WithMany(t => t.PostTags)
.HasForeignKey(pt => pt.TagId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict),
j => j
.HasOne(pt => pt.Post)
.WithMany(p => p.PostTags)
.HasForeignKey(pt => pt.PostId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict),
j =>
{
j.Property(pt => pt.PublicationDate).HasDefaultValueSql("CURRENT_TIMESTAMP");
j.HasKey(t => new { t.PostId, t.TagId });
});
}
}
public class Post
{
public int PostId { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public string Content { get; set; }
public ICollection<Tag> Tags { get; set; }
public List<PostTag> PostTags { get; set; }
}
public class Tag
{
public string TagId { get; set; }
public ICollection<Post> Posts { get; set; }
public List<PostTag> PostTags { get; set; }
}
public class PostTag
{
public DateTime PublicationDate { get; set; }
public int PostId { get; set; }
public Post Post { get; set; }
public string TagId { get; set; }
public Tag Tag { get; set; }
}
Sources:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/ef/core/modeling/relationships?tabs=fluent-api%2Cfluent-api-simple-key%2Csimple-key#join-entity-type-configuration
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/microsoft.entityframeworkcore.deletebehavior?view=efcore-5.0
This does require you to remove the many to many relationship yourself or you will receive the following error when you remove a parent entity:
The association between entity types '' and '' has been severed, but
the relationship is either marked as required or is implicitly
required because the foreign key is not nullable. If the
dependent/child entity should be deleted when a required relationship
is severed, configure the relationship to use cascade deletes.
Consider using 'DbContextOptionsBuilder.EnableSensitiveDataLogging' to
see the key values
You can solve this by using DeleteBehavior.ClientCascade instead which will allow EF to perform cascade deletes on loaded entities.
internal class MyContext : DbContext
{
public MyContext(DbContextOptions<MyContext> options)
: base(options)
{
}
public DbSet<Post> Posts { get; set; }
public DbSet<Tag> Tags { get; set; }
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Entity<Post>()
.HasMany(p => p.Tags)
.WithMany(p => p.Posts)
.UsingEntity<PostTag>(
j => j
.HasOne(pt => pt.Tag)
.WithMany(t => t.PostTags)
.HasForeignKey(pt => pt.TagId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Cascade),
j => j
.HasOne(pt => pt.Post)
.WithMany(p => p.PostTags)
.HasForeignKey(pt => pt.PostId)
.OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.ClientCascade),
j =>
{
j.Property(pt => pt.PublicationDate).HasDefaultValueSql("CURRENT_TIMESTAMP");
j.HasKey(t => new { t.PostId, t.TagId });
});
}
}
public class Post
{
public int PostId { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
public string Content { get; set; }
public ICollection<Tag> Tags { get; set; }
public List<PostTag> PostTags { get; set; }
}
public class Tag
{
public string TagId { get; set; }
public ICollection<Post> Posts { get; set; }
public List<PostTag> PostTags { get; set; }
}
public class PostTag
{
public DateTime PublicationDate { get; set; }
public int PostId { get; set; }
public Post Post { get; set; }
public string TagId { get; set; }
public Tag Tag { get; set; }
}
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/microsoft.entityframeworkcore.deletebehavior?view=efcore-5.0
None of the aforementioned solutions worked for me. What I had to do was use a nullable int (int?) on the foreign key that was not required (or not a not null column key) and then delete some of my migrations.
Start by deleting the migrations, then try the nullable int.
Problem was both a modification and model design. No code change was necessary.
The simple way is to, Edit your migration file (cascadeDelete: true) into (cascadeDelete: false) then after assign the Update-Database command in your Package Manager Console.if it's problem with your last migration then all right. Otherwise check your earlier migration history, copy those things, paste into your last migration file, after that do it the same thing. it perfectly works for me.
You could add this in your DataContext.cs, this works for me...
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<OneToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
modelBuilder.Conventions.Remove<ManyToManyCascadeDeleteConvention>();
}
I ran into the same problem and stuck for a long. The following steps saved me.
Go through the constraints and change the onDelete ReferentialAction to NoAction from Cascade
constraints: table =>
{
table.PrimaryKey("PK_table1", x => x.Id);
table.ForeignKey(
name: "FK_table1_table2_table2Id",
column: x => x.table2Id,
principalTable: "table2",
principalColumn: "Id",
onDelete: ReferentialAction.NoAction);
});
I have something like this
public class AppointmentReminder
{
public virtual int ReminderId { get; private set; }
public virtual CalendarAppointment CalendarAppointment { get; set; }
}
public class CalendarAppointment
{
public virtual int AppointmentId { get; private set; }
public virtual IList<AppointmentReminder> AppointmentReminders { get; set; }
public CalendarAppointment()
{
AppointmentReminders = new List<AppointmentReminder>();
}
}
public class AppointmentReminderMap : ClassMap<AppointmentReminder>
{
public AppointmentReminderMap()
{
Table("AppointmentReminders");
Id(x => x.ReminderId);
References(x => x.CalendarAppointment).ForeignKey("AppointmentId").Column("AppointmentId").Not.Nullable();
}
}
public class CalendarAppointmentMap : ClassMap<CalendarAppointment>
{
public CalendarAppointmentMap()
{
Table("CalendarAppointments");
Id(x => x.AppointmentId);
HasMany(x => x.AppointmentReminders);
}
}
As you can see I try to tell AppointmentReminderMap what the name of the fk is by trying ForiegnKey and Column yet when I get this error
Server Error in '/' Application.
Invalid column name 'CalendarAppointmentId'.
Invalid column name 'CalendarAppointmentId'.
Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.
Exception Details: System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: Invalid column name 'CalendarAppointmentId'.
Invalid column name 'CalendarAppointmentId'.
Source Error:
It looking for CalendarAppointmentId. I don't why it repeats it twice. So I let fluent nhibernate generate my database to see what was going on. When I look at the appointmentReminder table it has a fk of CalendarAppointmentId.
Why does it not use the name that I specified?
Here is my config
public ISessionFactory GetSessionFactory()
{
ISessionFactory fluentConfiguration = Fluently.Configure()
.Database(MsSqlConfiguration.MsSql2008.ConnectionString(c => c.FromConnectionStringWithKey("ConnectionString")))
.Mappings(m => m.FluentMappings.AddFromAssemblyOf<Framework.Data.Mapping.MyMap>().Conventions.Add(ForeignKey.EndsWith("Id")))
//.ExposeConfiguration(BuidSchema)
.BuildSessionFactory();
return fluentConfiguration;
}
private static void BuidSchema(NHibernate.Cfg.Configuration config)
{
new NHibernate.Tool.hbm2ddl.SchemaExport(config).Create(false, true);
}
Try:
HasMany(x => x.AppointmentReminders).KeyColumn("AppointmentId");
ForeignKey is the name of the fk constraint, not the column. You probably need to make sure the HasMany is using the same column name..."AppointmentId". That convention you're using is making it default to CalendarAppointmentId which conflicts with what you've specified on the one-to-many side. So..another option would be to remove the Column("AppointmentId") on the one-to-many and let the convention do it's thing.