Paul Gielens:ThoughtsService

another Endpoint to my thoughts

News

Syndication

Ads


Favorites

Projects

ADO.NET vNext Future Directions 3

Also see the first part and second part of this series of posts on the next generation data access for the .NET platform.

Specify a property type to be of an Enumeration Type [discussion]. Lucky for us the team is currently looking into enumeration types and also feel that it would be nice to have them.

Relationship with payloads is a way to model table A, table B and table AB with a DateTime field indicating when the relationship was established [discussion]. Right now the Entity Framework doesn't have a way to avoid defining three entity types to model this relationship using two simple 1:1 mappings. This is something the team would like to support in future releases, because the need is apparent.

Autogenerated Fields is a must-have feature [discussion].

Unique Constraints and Range Values is something the team is looking at [discussion].

Entity Mapper is a tool the tools team is working on that helps to create and edit mapping using a graphical user interface [discussion]. It allows for testing the mappings and issuing canned and free-style Entity SQL questions against an EDM schema. What about a tool to support the LINQ to Entities layer?

It will be possible to generate the relational database schema from the EDM schema using the Entity Mapper tool [discussion]. I'm really looking forward to this feature since it allows for a more Domain Driven Design style in which you take the model-first approach. What a coincidence, since I discussed the importance for supporting the model-first approach in tooling the other day with my colleagues Olaf and Melchior.

Posted: Sep 02 2006, 08:09 PM by p.gielens | with 4 comment(s)
Filed under:

Comments

FransBouma said:

"Right now the Entity Framework doesn't have a way to avoid defining three entity types to model this relationship using two simple 1:1 mappings."

That's not possible, how would you otherwise insert a value in the datetime field? Also, it's 2x a m:1 relation from AB to A and B resp. (or did you mean: class onto table mapping?)

# September 2, 2006 4:00 PM

p.gielens said:

Yes, through obscure code which magically inserts this entity and sets the datetime field accordingly.

Within the EDM model I want to be able to express this with a simple relations 1:1/1:m, so that A->B while the relational model is expressed in terms of A<->AB<->B assuming the application specific model (EDM model) isn't interested in the datatime information associated with an established relation.

# September 2, 2006 6:05 PM

FransBouma said:

Isn't that just defining a m:n relation in A and B for resp. A->B and B->A, NEXT TO the 1:m relations A ->AB and B -> AB ?

# September 3, 2006 1:09 PM

p.gielens said:

In ER, yes.

# September 3, 2006 5:31 PM
Leave a Comment

(required) 

(required) 

(optional)

(required)