For char/nchar and varchar/nvarchar columns use the actual column type and size in the parameter definition
I can see that EF uses varchar(8000) for the parameter instead of the actual type (char(6) in a particular case). Would it be possible for EF to use the actual column type and size instead of varchar(8000) or nvarchar(4000)?8 votes
I'm currently in the situation where I need to create a foreign key relationship for about 40 entities in my edmx back to a common "Users" table. I'd like to be able to solve this problem using Conventions, but it appears I cannot access the HasRequired or HasOptional functions from within a convention. I believe making these functions available would be a real time saver.3 votes
Please please please....
Can we have DbContext.Database Interfaced so that we can unit test our EF code first operations on DbContext.Database
allow to define a view by code first.
actually we can map an entity to a view but it then becomes nasty to:
- generate the database,
- migrate the database
- evolve the schema in general
It should be possible to:
- declare a DbSet that does not involve a table creation
- declare a view, with a linq query for example, that allows view creation.
For DbSet if should be a convention: if table name starts with vvv then it is a view, do not create a table
For view creation... no idea actually.5 votes
Should I have entities that use table splitting for storage, but do use a foreign key that is not the primary key, I want to be able to bring and store the data of them with the same structure I use for table splitting in fluent API as I do now with primary keys.3 votes
support sequence, not only for key, but as a common field/column/property. This should be mapped, in sql server case, to CREATE SEQUENCE.1 vote
I'd like to set the IServiceProvider in the ValidationContext constructor, so that I can access validation logic outside the IValidatableObject.Validate() method (and within custom data annotations) in a loosely coupled manner.
As far as I can see, ValidationProvider.GetEntityValidationContext() passes a null for the IServiceProvider and there is no way to override/"hook into" this method or InternalEntityEntry.GetValidationResult() from the public API.
Something like what ASP.NET MVC or Web API does with DataAnnotationsModelValidatorProvider or ValidatableObjectAdapter might be nice.1 vote
EF6 introduced a breaking change to the ObjectContext.ExecuteFunction() API causing it to start a transaction when one does not already exist. This behavior should be made optional.26 votes
The migrations in EF is great. I'd love to see it isolated, so it can be installed seperatly.
Not every project needs the full EF (in DDD layer, Migrations isn't required, but my .Data or DAL layer needs it) and this would make it easier to use tools like Dapper (that doesn't have a Migrations included)3 votes
I'd really like to not have all my model classes declared as public. Please support classes declared as internal. Even if there is a requirement to add InternalsVisibleTo("EntityFramework") or similar to the AssemblyInfo that is fine.3 votes
Built-in update and delete concurrencies by enable a standard rowrevision, combine with automatic scaffolding in mvc.5 votes
I know that EF code first automatically compiles queries and caches the results. But "Cold" queries are so slow.. Is possible to persist auto-compiled queries somewhere in the database so EF won't need to re-compile them again if that cache is lost (app restarted).3 votes
When using code first with an existing database, the "can not assign null to a non nullable type" exception can be realy painfull, because the compiler gives no warning, when i project a int? to a int.
It would be very usefull to have a Convention / Configuration that enables the automatic use of GetValueOrDefault for these cases.6 votes
It would be great to be able to do an "update-database" without having to execute the seeding commands as well. We are seeding quite a lot of meta data into our system, and it is a waste of time to wait for seeding each time we update/manipulate our model.
A flag in command prompt like
would suffice.7 votes
Request Designer Option to Support Conversion Mapping from DateTime to DateTimeOffset in light of community opinion seeminly moving toward DateTimeOffset as a standard. In fact, OASIS OData v4 pruned DateTime in favor of DateTimeOffset.
Unfortunately, modifying database schema is much easier said than done. Entity should have some sort of automapping/conversion to support the get/set between the persistence and poco layers.1 vote
We should be able to update with a where clause.
For example, you have an entity named "Product" that is bound to a "User". You want to be sure that the update is done on the product that you have your new values but also to the current user when the product is saved. Normally, in SQL we do a Update statement on Product table by setting new values to the product (where clause). What is missing is the ability to also add a AND statement to add the User Id. This way, we can be sure that the entity is updated to the user that it belongs.
Set Name = 'New Name'
WHERE Id = 134
AND UserId = Session.User.Id;
We should be able to update with a where clause.
For example, you have an entity named "Product" that is bound to a "User". You want to be sure that the update is done on the product that you have your new values but also to the current user when the product is saved. Normally, in SQL we do a Update statement on Product table by setting new values to the product (where clause). What is missing is the ability to also add a AND statement to add the User Id. This way, we can be sure that the entity…5 votes
Let us access indexers in the LINQ queries... Why do I need to save named POSTed data to an intermediate variable before I use it once to query the database? It worked fine in LINQ 2 SQL, and I have been waiting for it to be fixed since EF4.3 votes
The F# SqlEntityConnection Type Provider is a third way to interact with Entity framework (with the other two being an .edmx file and Code First).
This Type Provider doesn't support the updated low-level API changes that EF 6 requires, as far as I can tell. I'd love to have an updated version that supports the async features of EF 6.15 votes
assume we have a table named Transaction with a schema GL and another one named Transaction but belongs to AR schema,
until now , could not be mapped in code-first7 votes
It would be very usefull to get the name of the corresponding property or fieldname that causes the "The cast to value type 'System.Int32' failed because the materialized value is null...." exception.3 votes
- Don't see your idea?