Skip to main content

Entity Framework - Hybrid Code First

Let's talk about an interesting subject related to Entity Framework (EF). When you are using EF there are different mechanism to map your model:
  • Code First - we write the code first and the DB is generated automatically based on the code
  • Database First - we define the DB structure and POCO entities are created automatically
  • Model First - we design the model in a 'nice' designer. This designer will generate the classes and the database model
All of them are perfect and works great. Based on our needs, preferences and team skills we can decide to go with an approach or another, but in the end we will end up with the same thing. I will follow up later on with a different post where I will compare them.

Now, let's talk about different scenarios that is used by people. I saw in a lot of implementation where people are afraid of Code First or Model First. Because of this I realize that most of them are using a hybrid solution that I called Hybrid Code First.

Why I called Hybrid Code First? 
Well, people don't trust EF to generate the database schema. Because of this they are defining the model in the code as classes (POCO). Once this is done, they are defining the database schema - tables, indexes, keys, the relationship between entities. 
Once this step is done, they are defining the mapping between their classes (POCO) and database schema using Fluent API. In this way they are connecting each C# entity model to each table, column or key.

Is this a good approach?
Well...there is no the right answer. This approach it is used because people don't trust EF enough. People don't trust that EF can generate a database schema good enough. Based on this fears they combine Code First with Database First using Fluent API. 
This way they have full control to database schema and also to the model (C# entities). 
Of course, because of this versioning needs to be made manually, but they don't trust out of the box versioning of Code First, even if with EF 4.1 version, it works pretty great.

This is another approach to define and manage the entities model. Even if it is more time consuming, it offers a safety nest for developing team. Offering them control for both part (DB and Code).  

Comments

  1. We are using exactly this model - and not because we don't trust EF to generate the database create/update scripts - it's because very often the DB schema can't be inferred only from the mappings.

    An example:
    - all C# classes are mapped to database views, that perform (custom) queries over the DB tables - how could EF by itself generate such a database? :)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(

Azure AD and AWS Cognito side-by-side

In the last few weeks, I was involved in multiple opportunities on Microsoft Azure and Amazon, where we had to analyse AWS Cognito, Azure AD and other solutions that are available on the market. I decided to consolidate in one post all features and differences that I identified for both of them that we should need to take into account. Take into account that Azure AD is an identity and access management services well integrated with Microsoft stack. In comparison, AWS Cognito is just a user sign-up, sign-in and access control and nothing more. The focus is not on the main features, is more on small things that can make a difference when you want to decide where we want to store and manage our users.  This information might be useful in the future when we need to decide where we want to keep and manage our users.  Feature Azure AD (B2C, B2C) AWS Cognito Access token lifetime Default 1h – the value is configurable 1h – cannot be modified

What to do when you hit the throughput limits of Azure Storage (Blobs)

In this post we will talk about how we can detect when we hit a throughput limit of Azure Storage and what we can do in that moment. Context If we take a look on Scalability Targets of Azure Storage ( https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/articles/storage-scalability-targets/ ) we will observe that the limits are prety high. But, based on our business logic we can end up at this limits. If you create a system that is hitted by a high number of device, you can hit easily the total number of requests rate that can be done on a Storage Account. This limits on Azure is 20.000 IOPS (entities or messages per second) where (and this is very important) the size of the request is 1KB. Normally, if you make a load tests where 20.000 clients will hit different blobs storages from the same Azure Storage Account, this limits can be reached. How we can detect this problem? From client, we can detect that this limits was reached based on the HTTP error code that is returned by HTTP