Entity Framework: multiple database versions
We have a product that operates off a third party database which has a schema we cannot modify. At each install site, that database could be a wide range of versions. Some columns might exist in one database, but not in others, or might have different data types.
What are EF best practices for dealing with this problem? Obviously it will require some situational coding with different versions in mind, but my specific question is how to handle this with as little situational programming in the logic as possible. For the majority of database calls, the changes will not affect us, and I would like to retain the ability to write one query as often as possible.
We are able to know the version of the database at runtime, so we do not have to do any sleuthing to figure that out. We are running Entity Framework 6, but we are not too far into the project, so if later versions of EF can solve this better, we can switch.
Correct me if this is a duplicate, but I could only find existing questions related to accessing multiple databases at once. In this question, I would like to have only one database being passed around without having to specify "DbContextV10" and "DbContextV11". Generating a common interface will work to some degree, but it really depends on the magnitude of the version changes, which we do not know going forward, and we want to minimize our work in the future.
c# .net entity-framework
asked Nov 15 '18 at 18:04
Taylor HillTaylor Hill
4531918
add a comment |
We have a product that operates off a third party database which has a schema we cannot modify. At each install site, that database could be a wide range of versions. Some columns might exist in one database, but not in others, or might have different data types.
What are EF best practices for dealing with this problem? Obviously it will require some situational coding with different versions in mind, but my specific question is how to handle this with as little situational programming in the logic as possible. For the majority of database calls, the changes will not affect us, and I would like to retain the ability to write one query as often as possible.
We are able to know the version of the database at runtime, so we do not have to do any sleuthing to figure that out. We are running Entity Framework 6, but we are not too far into the project, so if later versions of EF can solve this better, we can switch.
Correct me if this is a duplicate, but I could only find existing questions related to accessing multiple databases at once. In this question, I would like to have only one database being passed around without having to specify "DbContextV10" and "DbContextV11". Generating a common interface will work to some degree, but it really depends on the magnitude of the version changes, which we do not know going forward, and we want to minimize our work in the future.
c# .net entity-framework
asked Nov 15 '18 at 18:04
Taylor HillTaylor Hill
4531918
2
This does not sound like a situation that any ORM will handle very well.
– stuartd
Nov 15 '18 at 18:09
Keep everything as generic as possible and only create one-offs any time the version affects your code. Just because there are 14 versions of something does not necessarily mean that those versions have to be breaking changes to your code. It really depends on how you interface with the database. If you want more than just a general comment (like this one) you will have to provide an Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example. Perhaps 2 or 3 versions of a schema where the (EF) code needs to stay generic...
– Igor
Nov 15 '18 at 18:11
add a comment |
We have a product that operates off a third party database which has a schema we cannot modify. At each install site, that database could be a wide range of versions. Some columns might exist in one database, but not in others, or might have different data types.
What are EF best practices for dealing with this problem? Obviously it will require some situational coding with different versions in mind, but my specific question is how to handle this with as little situational programming in the logic as possible. For the majority of database calls, the changes will not affect us, and I would like to retain the ability to write one query as often as possible.
We are able to know the version of the database at runtime, so we do not have to do any sleuthing to figure that out. We are running Entity Framework 6, but we are not too far into the project, so if later versions of EF can solve this better, we can switch.
Correct me if this is a duplicate, but I could only find existing questions related to accessing multiple databases at once. In this question, I would like to have only one database being passed around without having to specify "DbContextV10" and "DbContextV11". Generating a common interface will work to some degree, but it really depends on the magnitude of the version changes, which we do not know going forward, and we want to minimize our work in the future.
c# .net entity-framework
asked Nov 15 '18 at 18:04
Taylor HillTaylor Hill
4531918
We have a product that operates off a third party database which has a schema we cannot modify. At each install site, that database could be a wide range of versions. Some columns might exist in one database, but not in others, or might have different data types.
What are EF best practices for dealing with this problem? Obviously it will require some situational coding with different versions in mind, but my specific question is how to handle this with as little situational programming in the logic as possible. For the majority of database calls, the changes will not affect us, and I would like to retain the ability to write one query as often as possible.
We are able to know the version of the database at runtime, so we do not have to do any sleuthing to figure that out. We are running Entity Framework 6, but we are not too far into the project, so if later versions of EF can solve this better, we can switch.
Correct me if this is a duplicate, but I could only find existing questions related to accessing multiple databases at once. In this question, I would like to have only one database being passed around without having to specify "DbContextV10" and "DbContextV11". Generating a common interface will work to some degree, but it really depends on the magnitude of the version changes, which we do not know going forward, and we want to minimize our work in the future.
c# .net entity-framework
c# .net entity-framework
asked Nov 15 '18 at 18:04
Taylor HillTaylor Hill
4531918
asked Nov 15 '18 at 18:04
Taylor HillTaylor Hill
4531918
asked Nov 15 '18 at 18:04
Taylor HillTaylor Hill
4531918
asked Nov 15 '18 at 18:04
Taylor HillTaylor Hill
4531918
asked Nov 15 '18 at 18:04
Taylor HillTaylor Hill
4531918
4531918
2
This does not sound like a situation that any ORM will handle very well.
– stuartd
Nov 15 '18 at 18:09
Keep everything as generic as possible and only create one-offs any time the version affects your code. Just because there are 14 versions of something does not necessarily mean that those versions have to be breaking changes to your code. It really depends on how you interface with the database. If you want more than just a general comment (like this one) you will have to provide an Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example. Perhaps 2 or 3 versions of a schema where the (EF) code needs to stay generic...
– Igor
Nov 15 '18 at 18:11
add a comment |
2
This does not sound like a situation that any ORM will handle very well.
– stuartd
Nov 15 '18 at 18:09
Keep everything as generic as possible and only create one-offs any time the version affects your code. Just because there are 14 versions of something does not necessarily mean that those versions have to be breaking changes to your code. It really depends on how you interface with the database. If you want more than just a general comment (like this one) you will have to provide an Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example. Perhaps 2 or 3 versions of a schema where the (EF) code needs to stay generic...
– Igor
Nov 15 '18 at 18:11
2
2
This does not sound like a situation that any ORM will handle very well.
– stuartd
Nov 15 '18 at 18:09
This does not sound like a situation that any ORM will handle very well.
– stuartd
Nov 15 '18 at 18:09
Keep everything as generic as possible and only create one-offs any time the version affects your code. Just because there are 14 versions of something does not necessarily mean that those versions have to be breaking changes to your code. It really depends on how you interface with the database. If you want more than just a general comment (like this one) you will have to provide an Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example. Perhaps 2 or 3 versions of a schema where the (EF) code needs to stay generic...
– Igor
Nov 15 '18 at 18:11
Keep everything as generic as possible and only create one-offs any time the version affects your code. Just because there are 14 versions of something does not necessarily mean that those versions have to be breaking changes to your code. It really depends on how you interface with the database. If you want more than just a general comment (like this one) you will have to provide an Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example. Perhaps 2 or 3 versions of a schema where the (EF) code needs to stay generic...
– Igor
Nov 15 '18 at 18:11
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53325445%2fentity-framework-multiple-database-versions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53325445%2fentity-framework-multiple-database-versions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
This does not sound like a situation that any ORM will handle very well.
– stuartd
Nov 15 '18 at 18:09
Keep everything as generic as possible and only create one-offs any time the version affects your code. Just because there are 14 versions of something does not necessarily mean that those versions have to be breaking changes to your code. It really depends on how you interface with the database. If you want more than just a general comment (like this one) you will have to provide an Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example. Perhaps 2 or 3 versions of a schema where the (EF) code needs to stay generic...
– Igor
Nov 15 '18 at 18:11