Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Code Reviews

Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Are any downsides of hiding the actual Entity Framework Core DbSets and exposing only some generic methods?

+1
−0

I have recently started a project based on the clean architecture principle and noticed that it did not rely on generic repositories since Entity Framework's DbSets are doing the job just fine. In the referenced project the database context class implements an interface that exposes all the DbSets, but I am wondering if exposing only some generic methods is enough.

public class ApplicationDbContext : DbContext, IApplicationDbContext
{
    public ApplicationDbContext(
        DbContextOptions options) : base(options)
    {
    }
		
    public virtual DbSet<RefDepartment> RefDepartment { get; set; }
    public virtual DbSet<RefCurrency> RefCurrency { get; set; }
	
    // other DbSets come here	
    protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
    { 
        modelBuilder.ApplyConfigurationsFromAssembly(
               Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly());
        SeedData(modelBuilder);

        base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
    }

    private void SeedData(ModelBuilder modelBuilder)
    {
	// seed come here	
    }
	
    public IQueryable<TEnt> ReadSet<TEnt>() where TEnt : class
    {
        return Set<TEnt>().AsNoTracking();
    }
}

In this case, the interface will expose only the minimum required methods from DbContext and none of the actual DbSets:

/// <summary>
/// DB context interface
/// </summary>
public interface IApplicationDbContext
{
    /// <summary>
    /// db set 
    /// </summary>
    /// <typeparam name="TEntity"></typeparam>
    /// <returns></returns>
    DbSet<TEntity> Set<TEntity>() where TEntity : class;

    /// <summary>
    /// a read-only reference to a dbset
    /// </summary>
    /// <typeparam name="TEnt"></typeparam>
    /// <returns></returns>
    IQueryable<TEnt> ReadSet<TEnt>() where TEnt : class;

    /// <summary>
    /// save changes
    /// </summary>
    /// <param name="cancellationToken"></param>
    /// <returns></returns>
    Task<int> SaveChangesAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken);
}

The immediate advantage is that any new DbSet is specified in the class, but not in the interface. I am wondering if there are any side effects for such an approach since I do not remember being used in any other project.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

0 answers

Sign up to answer this question »