Update - The answer is apparently that DbLinq doesn't implement Dispose()
properly. D'oh!
The below is all sort of misleading - Bottom line: DbLinq is not (yet) equivalent to LinqToSql, as I assumed when I originally asked this question. Use it with caution!
I'm using the Repository Pattern with DbLinq. My repository objects implement IDisposable
, and the Dispose()
method does only thing--calls Dispose()
on the DataContext
. Whenever I use a repository, I wrap it in a using
block, like this:
public IEnumerable<Person> SelectPersons()
{
using (var repository = _repositorySource.GetPersonRepository())
{
return repository.GetAll(); // returns DataContext.Person as an IQueryable<Person>
}
}
This method returns an IEnumerable<Person>
, so if my understanding is correct, no querying of the database actually takes place until Enumerable<Person>
is traversed (e.g., by converting it to a list or array or by using it in a foreach
loop), as in this example:
var persons = gateway.SelectPersons();
// Dispose() is fired here
var personViewModels = (
from b in persons
select new PersonViewModel
{
Id = b.Id,
Name = b.Name,
Age = b.Age,
OrdersCount = b.Order.Count()
}).ToList(); // executes queries
In this example, Dispose()
gets called immediately after setting persons
, which is an IEnumerable<Person>
, and that's the only time it gets called.
So, three questions:
DataContext
still query the database for results after the DataContext
has been disposed?Dispose()
actually do?DataContext
, but my impression was that it's not a bad idea. Is there any reason not to dispose of a DbLinq DataContext
?1 How does this work? How can a disposed DataContext still query the database for results after the DataContext has been disposed?
It doesn't work. There's something you're not showing us. I'm guessing that either your repository class doesn't dispose the DataContext
properly/at the right time, or that you are perfunctorily writing ToList()
at the end of every query, which completely negates the query transformation and deferred execution you normally get.
Try the following code in a test app, I guarantee you that it will throw an ObjectDisposedException
:
// Bad code; do not use, will throw exception.
IEnumerable<Person> people;
using (var context = new TestDataContext())
{
people = context.Person;
}
foreach (Person p in people)
{
Console.WriteLine(p.ID);
}
This is the simplest possible reproducible case, and it will always throw. On the other hand, if you write people = context.Person.ToList()
instead, then the query results have already been enumerated inside the using
block, which I'll bet is what's happening in your case.
2 What does Dispose() actually do?
Among other things, it sets a flag indicating that the DataContext
is disposed, which is checked on every subsequent query and causes the DataContext
to throw an ObjectDisposedException
with the message Object name: 'DataContext accessed after Dispose.'.
It also closes the connection, if the DataContext
opened it and left it open.
3 I've heard that it is not necessary (e.g., see this question) to dispose of a DataContext, but my impression was that it's not a bad idea. Is there any reason not to dispose of a LinqToSql DataContext?
It is necessary to Dispose
the DataContext
, as it is necessary to Dispose
every other IDisposable
. You could potentially leak connections if you fail to dispose the DataContext
. You could also leak memory if any of the entities retrieved from the DataContext
are kept alive, since the context maintains an internal identity cache for the unit-of-work pattern it implements. But even if none of this were the case, it is not your concern what the Dispose
method does internally. Assume that it does something important.
IDisposable
is a contract that says, "cleanup may not be automatic; you need to dispose me when you're finished." You have no guarantees of whether or not the object has its own finalizer that cleans up after you if you forget to Dispose
. Implementations are subject to change, which is why it's not a good idea to rely on observed behaviour as opposed to explicit specifications.
The worst thing that can happen if you dispose an IDisposable
with an empty Dispose
method is that you waste a few CPU cycles. The worst thing that can happen if you fail to dispose an IDisposable
with a non-trivial implementation it is that you leak resources. The choice here is obvious; if you see an IDisposable
, don't forget to dispose it.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With