[2.0.1] Query: Unique-fy ordering & projection created by IncludeComp… #10061
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
smitpatel
requested review from
anpete,
maumar and
ajcvickers
and removed request for
anpete
anpete
reviewed
Oct 12, 2017
| { | ||
| if (methodCallExpression.IsEFProperty()) | ||
| { | ||
| var propertyName = (string)(methodCallExpression.Arguments[1] as ConstantExpression)?.Value; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
EFProperty method call so no null ref.
anpete
reviewed
Oct 12, 2017
| @@ -197,19 +197,40 @@ var orderByClause | |||
| { | |||
| var propertyExpression = querySourceReferenceExpression.CreateEFPropertyExpression(property); | |||
|
|
|||
| var orderingExpression = Expression.Convert( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need to do this if FK is required?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to determine if the querySourceReferenceExpression here is nullable or not. Do we have a way to identify that?
anpete
reviewed
Oct 12, 2017
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private static bool MatchEfPropertyToMemberExpression(MemberExpression memberExpression, MethodCallExpression methodCallExpression) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have similar code in LiftOrderBy
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yup, we do. I tried to make changes minimal in patch.
anpete
approved these changes
Oct 12, 2017
…iler with existing ordering Resolves #10045 The issue: When you have reference.collection include and orderby reference.property, the ordering is expanded by navigation rewrite and it is null-compensated. Whereas the ordering collection include adds missed null-compensation hence they were not matching property causing multiple orderings/projection in QueryModel, which would map to same SqlFragment causing projection count mismatch. The fix is to unique-fy ordering by including null-compensation. Due to new pattern generated by Include, downstream code needs to understand & match more patterns.
smitpatel
force-pushed
the
orderbyissue
branch
from
cb83d65 to
81d6c37
Compare
|
Sorry for the noob question, but when would this patch be available on NuGet? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
…iler with existing ordering
Resolves #10045
The issue: When you have reference.collection include and orderby reference.property, the ordering is expanded by navigation rewrite and it is null-compensated. Whereas the ordering collection include adds missed null-compensation hence they were not matching property causing multiple orderings/projection in QueryModel, which would map to same SqlFragment causing projection count mismatch.
The fix is to unique-fy ordering by including null-compensation. Due to new pattern generated by Include, downstream code needs to understand & match more patterns.
I will add quirks once approved.