Cant get list of tables on server

Discussion of open issues, suggestions and bugs regarding Entity Framework support in ADO.NET Data providers
Post Reply
sam2
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu 01 Sep 2011 18:10

Cant get list of tables on server

Post by sam2 » Thu 01 Sep 2011 18:25

Created a connection to my oracle server, click test, works ok.
After an hour of frustration, discovered change view to all objects is required for connection to be useful.

Added an .edmx file to my project, wizard hangs when building list of server objects. Rebooted, finally got a list of tables.

Selected 3 tables and 1 view. Two tables were added.

Deleted .edmx file and started again. Wizard hangs again when building list of server objects. Rebooted, finally got a list of tables.

Selected 3 tables and 1 view. Two tables were added.

There are several thousand tables/views/procs/etc. on this server. I'm waiting 3+ minutes every time I try to add tables to the model. When it works it takes about a minute to build the list of objects.

Is there a way to make it work?

Thanks,

Sam

Shalex
Site Admin
Posts: 8245
Joined: Thu 14 Aug 2008 12:44

Post by Shalex » Fri 02 Sep 2011 11:05

Entity Data Model Wizard (the ADO.NET Entity Data Model item) is not optimized for Oracle: http://www.devart.com/dotconnect/oracle ... izard.html.

Please try using Entity Developer (the Devart Entity Model item) instead.

sam2
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu 01 Sep 2011 18:10

Post by sam2 » Fri 02 Sep 2011 19:54

Got it, thanks.

wgkwvl
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010 15:13

Post by wgkwvl » Mon 12 Sep 2011 09:49

Hi,

we are also noticing the slowness / hanging with the edmx model.
But we also notice that it is fast the first 2 times,
and getting slower the next times, till after 7 -8 times it takes forever / hangs.

Only after shutting down the database and restarting it, it goes faster again.

So the slowness seems to grow over time.


Is there a clear migration path between the ADO.NET Entity Data Mode and the Devart Entity Model ?
Because by now we have customized our generated code by a lot

Shalex
Site Admin
Posts: 8245
Joined: Thu 14 Aug 2008 12:44

Post by Shalex » Tue 13 Sep 2011 13:54

wgkwvl wrote:Is there a clear migration path between the ADO.NET Entity Data Mode and the Devart Entity Model ?
Because by now we have customized our generated code by a lot
Here is a possible way of migration (but we have not tested it):
1) rename extension "edmx" -> "edml";
2) change Build Action of file: "EntityDeploy" -> "DevartEntityDeploy";
3) clear the custom tool of the file;
4) edit your T4-template: set correct name for the new file (if necessary, using a full path).
Implement transformation of T4-template for each project build, e.g.: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1646 ... very-build;
5) to create correctly EF-metadata for EF T4-template, it can be necessary to modify base EF T4-template as it is described at http://www.devart.com/blogs/dotconnect/ ... tml#second.

wgkwvl
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010 15:13

Post by wgkwvl » Mon 05 Mar 2012 21:58

I finally tried the migration,
In version 6.30.202 it complained about some closing tags on functionimport;

then i installed version 6.70.311, opening the model in the entity developer worked,
but validation of the model fails with some errors like :
Properties referred by the Principal Role Afda_Campings must be exactly identical to the key of the EntityType Afda.DAL.Afda_Campings referred to by the Principal Role in the relationship constraint for Relationship Afda.DAL.Afda_CampingsAfda_Straten. Make sure all the key properties are specified in the Principal Role.

However my object Straten has a primary key straat_id of type int64,
the same type as the straat_id in campings







..snip..






..snip..








..snip..








any suggestions what i should do to make this work ?

Shalex
Site Admin
Posts: 8245
Joined: Thu 14 Aug 2008 12:44

Post by Shalex » Thu 15 Mar 2012 08:42

There is no association and its mapping in your post. Please send us a test model so that we can reproduce the error in our environment.

Post Reply