Fix support for containment paths in nav prop bindings #1109

mikepizzo · 2018-03-07T20:02:48Z

Description

Fixed numerous issues with containment nav prop bindings.
-Fixed issues with locating the proper contained entity set in FindNavigationTarget
-Fixed nav prop binding issues with nav props on complex types
-Fixed issues with reading/writing nav prop bindings for contained entity sets
-Added support for writing context for contained nav props under LibraryCompatibility.Version6

Added support for entity types used exclusively in singletons and single-valued nav props without defining a key.

Checklist (Uncheck if it is not completed)

Test cases added
Build and test with one-click build and test script passed

Additional work necessary

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T00:41:43Z

...nctionalTests/Tests/TestUtils/Common/Microsoft.Test.OData.Utils/ODataLibTest/ModelBuilder.cs

@@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ public static void AddDefaultContainerFixup(this EdmModel model, string namespac
                };

            // create NavigationPropertyBinding
-            foreach (EdmNavigationProperty property in model.SchemaElements.OfType<IEdmEntityType>().SelectMany(entityType => entityType.DeclaredNavigationProperties()))
+            foreach (EdmNavigationProperty property in model.SchemaElements.OfType<IEdmEntityType>().SelectMany(entityType => entityType.DeclaredNavigationProperties()).Where(p=>p.ContainsTarget == false))


p=>p.ContainsTarget == false [](start = 175, length = 28)

can use p => !p.ContainsTarget

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T00:42:55Z

...ervices/UnitTests/ServerUnitTests/Stubs/ExpressionTreeTests/ExpressionTreeToXmlSerializer.cs

@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ internal class ExpressionTreeToXmlSerializer : ExpressionVisitor
        public static String SerializeToString(Expression expression)
        {
            outputText = new StringBuilder();
-            writer = XmlTextWriter.Create(outputText);
+            writer = XmlWriter.Create(outputText);


XmlWriter [](start = 21, length = 9)

Is it a bug?

XmlTextWriter.Create is not supported in some environments.

In reply to: 174972609 [](ancestors = 174972609)

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T00:44:36Z

test/FunctionalTests/Tests/DataEdmLib/FunctionalTests/VocabularyValidationTests.cs

@@ -425,6 +423,151 @@ public void ValidateOutOfLineAnnotationWithValidTargetsInReferencedModel()
            Assert.IsTrue(validationResult, "Expected no validation errors from annotation with targets in an external model.");
        }

+        [TestMethod]
+        public void ValidateUnresolvedInlineAnnotationTargets()


public void ValidateUnresolvedInlineAnnotationTargets() [](start = 8, length = 55)

The test cases seem not related to nav prop bindings?

Yes; I ran across several other issues in trying to fix navpropbindings, and in order to get a build out that included all of the fixes I put them in the same PR.

In reply to: 174972862 [](ancestors = 174972862)

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T00:45:04Z

test/FunctionalTests/Tests/DataEdmLib/FunctionalTests/VocabularyValidationTests.cs

+    <Annotation Term=""AnnotationNS.UnknownValueTerm"" String=""Hello world!"" />
+    <Annotation Term=""RefNS.UnknownValueTerm"" String=""Hello world!""/>
+  </EntityType>
+  <Action Name=""SomeFunction""><ReturnType Type=""Edm.Int32""/>


<ReturnType Type=""Edm.Int32""/> [](start = 32, length = 32)

put returntype at new line? #Resolved

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T00:49:28Z

test/FunctionalTests/Microsoft.OData.Edm.Tests/Validation/ValidationRuleSetTests.cs

-            var items = typeof(ValidationRules).GetFields().Where(f => f.Name != "NavigationPropertyEntityMustNotIndirectlyContainItself")
+            var items = typeof(ValidationRules).GetFields().Where(f =>
+                f.Name != "NavigationPropertyEntityMustNotIndirectlyContainItself" &&
+                f.Name != "EntityTypeKeyMissingOnEntityType")


"EntityTypeKeyMissingOnEntityType" [](start = 26, length = 34)

I'd like to keep it unremoved and add the key in the corresponding test cases? #ByDesign

We can't remove it, because it is public, but we don't want it to be part of the ValidationRules. This test verifies that all of the defined tests are part of the validation rules, so we need to omit the two that are defined but should not be part of the validation rules.

In reply to: 174973472 [](ancestors = 174973472)

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T00:49:37Z

test/FunctionalTests/Microsoft.OData.Edm.Tests/Schema/EdmSingletonTests.cs

@@ -9,6 +9,8 @@
 using Microsoft.OData.Edm;
 using Microsoft.OData.Edm.Vocabularies;
 using Xunit;
+using System;
+using System.IO;


move to top #Resolved

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T00:50:45Z

...onalTests/Microsoft.OData.Edm.Tests/ScenarioTests/OasisRelationshipChangesAcceptanceTests.cs

@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
 using Microsoft.OData.Edm.Validation;
 using Xunit;
 using ErrorStrings = Microsoft.OData.Edm.Strings;
+using System.Linq;


System.Linq; [](start = 6, length = 12)

move to top #Resolved

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T00:54:46Z

test/FunctionalTests/Microsoft.OData.Edm.Tests/Csdl/CsdlReaderTests.cs

@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
 using Microsoft.OData.Edm.Vocabularies.V1;
 using Xunit;
 using ErrorStrings = Microsoft.OData.Edm.Strings;
+using System.IO;


System.IO; [](start = 6, length = 10)

move to top #Resolved

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T01:00:59Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Edm/Validation/InterfaceValidator.cs

+                        followupErrors.AddRange(this.ValidateStructure(new EdmVocabularyAnnotation(annotatable, annotation.Term, annotation.Qualifier, annotation.Value)));
+                    }
+                }
+            }


That seems not related to the nav prop binding #ByDesign

Right; I ran into this while working through some related issues and just fixed it here rather than opening a separate PR.

In reply to: 174974871 [](ancestors = 174974871)

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T01:02:23Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Edm/Validation/InterfaceValidator.cs

+                foreach (IEdmVocabularyAnnotation annotation in annotatable.VocabularyAnnotations(this.model))
+                {
+                    // Inline annotations have a null target.
+                    if (annotation.Target == null)


annotation.Target == null [](start = 24, length = 25)

So, do we use "annotation.Target == null" to distinguish inline from outOfLine? #ByDesign

Yes.

In reply to: 174975029 [](ancestors = 174975029)

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T01:03:59Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Edm/Validation/ValidationRuleSet.cs

@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ public sealed class ValidationRuleSet : IEnumerable<ValidationRule>
                ValidationRules.EntityTypeInvalidKeyNullablePart,
                ValidationRules.EntityTypeEntityKeyMustBeScalar,
                ValidationRules.EntityTypeInvalidKeyKeyDefinedInBaseClass,
-                ValidationRules.EntityTypeKeyMissingOnEntityType,
+////                ValidationRules.EntityTypeKeyMissingOnEntityType,


ValidationRules.EntityTypeKeyMissingOnEntityType, [](start = 20, length = 49)

remove? #ByDesign

I wanted to leave it here, explicitly commented out, so we knew we intended it to be disabled.

In reply to: 174975195 [](ancestors = 174975195)

xuzhg · 2018-03-16T01:05:44Z

...a.Core.Tests/IntegrationTests/Evaluation/AutoComputePayloadMetadataInJsonIntegrationTests.cs

@@ -936,6 +936,7 @@ public void WritingInFullMetadataModeWithExpandAndProjectionShouldWriteMissingMe

            const string selectClause = "StreamProp1,Namespace.AlwaysBindableAction1,Namespace.AlwaysBindableFunction1,DeferredNavLink";
            const string expandClause = "ExpandedNavLink($select=StreamProp1,Namespace.AlwaysBindableAction1;$expand=ExpandedNavLink($select=StreamProp2,Namespace.AlwaysBindableAction1))";
+
            this.GetWriterOutputForContentTypeAndKnobValue("application/json;odata.metadata=full", true, itemsToWrite, Model, EntitySet, EntityType, selectClause, expandClause)


maybe keep this file unchanged? #Resolved

AlanWong-MS · 2018-03-16T18:20:58Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Edm/ExtensionMethods/ExtensionMethods.cs

+                    // of the path from the contained entity set, but retained the old behavior as well
+                    // for backward compatibility. In the next breaking change we should remove that
+                    // behavior in FindNavigationTarget and remove this special handling of containsTarget
+                    // by always clearing the path.


Do we have any items to track this task? (along with similarly commented parts of this PR) #Resolved

Opened #1114.

In reply to: 175176585 [](ancestors = 175176585)

AlanWong-MS

Approved with +1 to Sam's comments.

biaol-odata · 2018-03-18T20:15:57Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Core/JsonLight/ODataJsonLightWriter.cs

@@ -786,13 +786,15 @@ protected override void StartNestedResourceInfoWithContent(ODataNestedResourceIn
            {
                // Write @odata.context annotation for navigation property
                var containedEntitySet = this.CurrentScope.NavigationSource as IEdmContainedEntitySet;
-                if (containedEntitySet != null)
+                if (containedEntitySet != null && this.jsonLightOutputContext.MessageWriterSettings.LibraryCompatibility == ODataLibraryCompatibility.Version6)


ODataLibraryCompatibility [](start = 124, length = 25)

what should we do for the case of setting.LibraryCompatiblity being Version7 or Latest? #ByDesign

We shouldn't write context Url for nav props unless the contextUrl doesn't follow convention; and we currently have no way for the app to tell us that it doesn't follow convention, so we should just not write it.

In reply to: 175302067 [](ancestors = 175302067)

biaol-odata · 2018-03-18T20:23:51Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Core/ODataContextUrlInfo.cs

            if (selectList.Any())
            {
+                // https://github.com/OData/odata.net/issues/1104
+                // If the user explicitly selects and expands a nav prop, we should include both forms in contextUrl
+                // We can't, though, because SelectExpandBinder.AddExplicitNavPropsWhereNeeded adds all of the expanded items


SelectExpandBinder.AddExplicitNavPropsWhereNeeded [](start = 45, length = 49)

This method doesn't exist. Not mentioned in PR #1104 either. Should it be SelectExpandClauseFinisher.AddExplicitNavPropLinksWhereNecessary instead? #Resolved

Yes; thanks.

In reply to: 175302307 [](ancestors = 175302307)

biaol-odata · 2018-03-18T20:24:01Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Core/ODataContextUrlInfo.cs

        {
-            return string.IsNullOrEmpty(subExpand) ? null : expandNode + ODataConstants.ContextUriProjectionStart + subExpand + ODataConstants.ContextUriProjectionEnd;
+            return string.IsNullOrEmpty(subExpand) && version <= ODataVersion.V4 ? null : expandNode + ODataConstants.ContextUriProjectionStart + subExpand + ODataConstants.ContextUriProjectionEnd;
        }


nit: please break this long line into two. #Resolved

biaol-odata · 2018-03-18T20:32:18Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Core/SelectedPropertiesNode.cs

        /// <returns>The sub expanded node passed in.</returns>
-        private static SelectedPropertiesNode ProcessSubExpand(string nodeName, SelectedPropertiesNode subExpandNode)
+        private static SelectedPropertiesNode ProcessSubExpand(string nodeName, SelectedPropertiesNode subExpandNode, ODataVersion version)


, ODataVersion version [](start = 116, length = 22)

This newly added "version" argument is not referenced/used in this function? #ByDesign

No, but we want to pass this function as the first parameter to SelectExpandClause.Traverse, which takes a Func<string, SelectedPropertiesNode, ODataVersion); it's not used in this case, but it is used in other cases so it needs to be part of the signature.

In reply to: 175302563 [](ancestors = 175302563)

biaol-odata · 2018-03-18T20:36:18Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Edm/EdmUtil.cs

@@ -231,7 +231,11 @@ internal static string ParameterizedName(IEdmOperation operation)
            foreach (IEdmOperationParameter parameter in operation.Parameters)
            {
                string typeName = "";
-                if (parameter.Type.IsCollection())
+                if (parameter.Type == null)


parameter.Type == null [](start = 20, length = 22)

I cannot see how this typeName resolution for Untyped related to nav prop binding. Is this for a separate issue? #ByDesign

Yes. I combined into same PR so we could verify in the same nightly builds.

In reply to: 175302690 [](ancestors = 175302690)

biaol-odata · 2018-03-18T20:44:29Z

src/Microsoft.OData.Edm/Schema/EdmContainedEntitySet.cs


    /// <summary>
    /// Represents an EDM contained entity set.
    /// </summary>
    internal class EdmContainedEntitySet : EdmEntitySetBase, IEdmContainedEntitySet
    {
+        internal readonly IEdmPathExpression NavigationPath;


NavigationPath [](start = 45, length = 14)

nit: should we use a private member named "navigationPath", and expose it thru internal property named "NavigationPath"? #Resolved

biaol-odata · 2018-03-18T21:10:58Z

...s/Framework/Workspaces/NonClrWorkspaces/NonClrService/NonClrExpressionTreeToXmlSerializer.cs

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ internal class ExpressionTreeToXmlSerializer : System.Data.Test.Astoria.LateBoun
        public static String Serialize(Expression exp)
        {
            outputText = new StringBuilder();
-            writer = XmlTextWriter.Create(outputText);
+            writer = XmlWriter.Create(outputText);


XmlWriter.Create(outputText); [](start = 21, length = 29)

doesn't seem like this change is related to nav prop bindings. Code expression simplification instead? #ByDesign

This was a bug that prevent compilation on certain platforms.

In reply to: 175303989 [](ancestors = 175303989)

mikepizzo added 2 commits March 5, 2018 22:44

Fix containment nav prop bindings.

1f715aa

Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/OData/odata.net

4d47ab5

mikepizzo force-pushed the newContainmentNavPropBindings branch 3 times, most recently from 9f6224a to e134d91 Compare March 12, 2018 09:00

mikepizzo force-pushed the newContainmentNavPropBindings branch 3 times, most recently from 810b3d8 to 8cdf610 Compare March 15, 2018 07:58

Fix annotation validation and contextUrl validation tests.

70ff045

mikepizzo force-pushed the newContainmentNavPropBindings branch from 8cdf610 to 70ff045 Compare March 16, 2018 00:16

mikepizzo requested review from xuzhg, AlanWong-MS and biaol-odata March 16, 2018 00:30

xuzhg reviewed Mar 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

AlanWong-MS reviewed Mar 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

AlanWong-MS approved these changes Mar 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

biaol-odata reviewed Mar 18, 2018

View reviewed changes

mikepizzo mentioned this pull request Mar 19, 2018

Clean up bindingpath handling for containment nav props in 8.x #1114

Open

Address Code Review Comments.

6e09770

AlanWong-MS merged commit b214dbf into OData:master Mar 19, 2018

mikepizzo deleted the newContainmentNavPropBindings branch March 30, 2018 19:17

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix support for containment paths in nav prop bindings #1109

Fix support for containment paths in nav prop bindings #1109

mikepizzo commented Mar 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

AlanWong-MS Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

AlanWong-MS left a comment

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

mikepizzo Mar 19, 2018

Fix support for containment paths in nav prop bindings #1109

Fix support for containment paths in nav prop bindings #1109

Conversation

mikepizzo commented Mar 7, 2018 • edited Loading

Description

Checklist (Uncheck if it is not completed)

Additional work necessary

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlanWong-MS Mar 16, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlanWong-MS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 • edited by mikepizzo Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mikepizzo commented Mar 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

xuzhg Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

AlanWong-MS Mar 16, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading

biaol-odata Mar 18, 2018 •

edited by mikepizzo

Loading