Contents
As a modern object-database mapper for .NET, it supports LINQ queries, change tracking, updates and schema migrations. Relationship types are characterized by their degree or the count of entity types they relate and their multiplicity. However, in the initial release of ADO.NET Entity Framework, relationships are limited to a binary bi-directional relationship. Multiplicity defines how many entity instances can be related together. Based on multiplicity, relationships can be either one-to-one, one-to-many, or many-to-many.
- But not all DBMSs have equivalent functionality and a set of standard embedded functions.
- QCon London brings together the world’s most innovative senior software engineers across multiple domains to share their real-world implementation of emerging trends and practices.
- If you wanted to access it when using EF6 DbContext, you’d have to drill into the low-level ObjectContext.
- The general recommendations I’ve seen are that if you’re not doing high performance queries, EF Core is fast and easy to use.
EF Core works with .NET Core but with .NET Core, it is recommended to use EF Core. Of course, all the features are not released yet and there are many features which are missing. The EDMX/Designer is missing in EF Core so model first is not possible with EF Core without using third party tools. EF Core supports both, database-first and code-first, approaches.
Forgetting about projections
However, I didn’t want to use every single library in this project. On the other hand, to create a fair comparison environment, the same model is used for both Dapper and EF with the same mapping features. As we are testing their most common features, creating the connection will not be involved in this project as they can be held differently by the environment they are working. For instance, creating the DbContext of EF might be handled by dependency injection of a .Net Core WebAPI project whereas SqlConnection might be created by any sort of ConnectionPool. In test methods, I’ll be using a single Connection/DbContext and all the tests will use these two. It’s easy to forget the scale of the data we’ll be dealing with in production during development.
Some co-workers had already done so earlier using .NET Core 1 with mixed results. With the release of .NET Core 2 and Visual Studio 2017, it seemed like a good time for our team to join them in the deep end. I would recommend reading Who’s Using Amazon Web Services the earlier blog post first as it will provide a detailed background on the core concepts of code first which this blog post will not cover. I’m building an API on ASP.NET Core and I tried using EF Core for my database mappings.
Microsoft rebuilt EF Core from the ground up and removed many of the internal dependencies and providers that EF 6 had . In the long run, that will make EF Core much more extensible and lighter weight. In the short run, we’ll have to deal with some pain as some features and command we relied on in EF 6 are not implemented yet and some may never be. If you are interested in what the EF team is working on for future releases, you can check out the EF Core Roadmap. Keep in mind while reading this post that we used EF Core 2.0 for this project. At the time of this writing, that was the latest version of EF Core, but EF Core 2.1 is due to be released in the second quarter of 2018 and things will certainly change with that release.
Getting started with EF Core is relatively straightforward, but mastering it can take an entire career. Entity Framework 6.4 was the latest release of the classic framework. Although Entity Framework 6 is still supported, it is no longer being developed and will only receive fixes for security issues.
In the code-first approach, EF Core API creates the database and tables using migration based on the conventions and configuration provided in your domain classes. To set up this benchmark, I will create two .NET Core 3 class libraries. Each class library will contain a package reference to EF6 and EF Core 3 respectively. Each DbContext will be connecting to its own database on my SQL Server LocalDB instance.
Native SQL
Copy Model classes from .NET Framework to .NET Core project and setup dependency injection for DBContext instance. The simplest change is to explicitly set your connection string and to set up dependency injection for a DbContext instance. Select ResultsThe results show us that all the methods except the “Get ALL” have almost the same performance. For most of the results, memory allocation is better on the Dapper side. EF has a better result on SingleOrDefault, Filter By FirstName with raw SQL whereas Dapper is better on Find, Filter By FirstName with LinQ.
Version 5.0.0 was released on August 11, 2012 and is targeted at .NET framework 4.5. Also, this version is available for .Net framework 4, but without any runtime advantages over version 4. When there is a single update statement, EF Core 7 doesn’t use database transactions at all. GraphQL can be a great choice for client to server communication, but it requires investment to maximize its potential.
BenchmarkDotNet – EF6 performs better than EF Core for simple ToList() calls
Finally, there’s the InitializedInstance that receives the populated entity object as a parameter. Sometimes, EMDX auto-generated scripts still need modification which needs good SQL level of expertise to get a workaround. Why developer experience is the key to better software, straight from the… @csstudent1418 I just noticed you’re change of title on the question. I think the key point is, the differences are not subtle – they are fundamental. It is not a requirement in EF Core that the DbContext is created by injection.
Except for the between method, memory allocations look the same. The biggest difference is in searching the records with starts with “A”. Although developers always try to create efficient structures, with the third-party integrations our hands are mostly tied. When this is the case, it becomes necessary to speed up our integrations.
What’s the difference between EF Core and EF6?
Like ASP.NET MVC, its source code is hosted at GitHub using Git. This version has a number of improvements for code-first support. Entity Framework is an open source object–relational mapping framework for ADO.NET. It was originally shipped as an integral part of .NET Framework, however starting with Entity Framework version Android Creating a Calendar View app 6.0 it has been delivered separately from the .NET Framework. EF Core 6 brought the ability to apply bulk configurations, which is wonderful. You can override the ConfigureConventions to apply things like HaveColumnType to all properties in the model that are strings, instead of doing it per property in each relevant entity.
Still, developers must be careful not to refactor their code into an SQL injection vulnerable state inadvertently. Let’s start with a parameterized SQL using an interpolated string. We now get the same results and have cached the same query in two separate instances of its use.
Perhaps all strings for your SQL Server database should default to nvarchar, rather than nvarchar. You can create a convention for that in a class, add it to your project, and then add it to the configuration builder. When CreatingInstance is hit, you have access to the instance of the object being created, although its properties have not yet been populated. And it’s this entity that’s returned by default from the method. For you long-time users of Entity Framework, before EF4 gave you POCO support and the DbContext, you had a more tightly coupled way of implementing EF using an ObjectContext. Through that API, you had access to an ObjectMaterialized event handler that allowed you to inject your own rules and logic as the object was being created from query results.
Some of them might be handled by Dapper too with extension libraries. So instead of comparing these two, we can create a structure that we are able to use both in the same project. However, we should still wait for EF7 to make this comparison again and see if we have any performance improvements. It’s important to understand that connections to databases are not guaranteed to be stable.
If it is created by injection, it must be configured with the appropriate DbContextOptions. If created directly, the DbContextOptions must be provided directly. I knew I 13 Best Podcasts on Startups and Growth in 2022 got it to work sometime before and I noticed that that was when I used EF 6 instead of EF Core. So I uninstalled the EF Core packages and installed EF 6 package instead.
Entity types and entity sets just form the logical EDM schema, and can be exposed as anything. ADO.NET Entity Framework includes Object Service that presents these entities as Objects with the elements and relationships exposed as properties. Thus Entity objects are just front-end to the instances of the EDM entity types, which lets Object Oriented languages access and use them.
(I try to use non-tracking to reduce some memory used on contexts that are only created to read from the db as I set it to transient. Entity splitting is a mapping that allows you to persist properties of a single entity across multiple tables or views. In the original Entity Framework, you had the ability to map stored procedures to entities.
EF Core also brings more extensibility options to developers to address data access concerns like query filtering, table splitting, and inheritance. The added benefits of better debugging in EF Core make the library easier to recommend to developers. EF Core is less of a black box than previous versions, helping developers diagnose issues faster. There are drawbacks to scaffolding that we can avoid by starting with a Code-First approach.
The TPH approach uses a single table with columns for each property unique to an entity with a Discriminator column. In the following example, both Movie and Series share a Productions table. EF Core implements the Unit of Work pattern, keeping track of changes to our entities and then ultimately sending those changes back to our database engine. The approach has many advantages when modifying data, but comes with a noticeable performance cost. The best option is to run our tests against a production-like environment, as we’ll eliminate issues that could arise from engine variations.
