-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Primitive collections #30731
Comments
@roji I'm sorry to bother you, I found that |
@AndriySvyryd do we have an issue already tracking this? I found #28861 but that seems to be something else (am still not sure exactly what though 😅 ) In any case, we're likely to work on mapping JSON through complex types (as opposed to owned entities), and should make that work there - JSON mapping via owned entity types is likely to be de-prioritized. |
@vchirikov Oh, I see now. We only allow structs to be mapped as complex types. So as @roji mentioned, be on the lookout for #31252 and #31411 |
Do you have any suggestions for implementing a List<List< int>>? since it doesn't work with OwnsMany either. |
This user story tracks support for primitive collections, i.e. the ability to map a property of type
int[]
to the database, as a JSON array (by default). Where supported, such collections are also fully queryable via the regular LINQ operators.As a by-product of this, the translation for
intParam.Contains(b => b.Property)
would be changed from the current IN with constants translation to a string parameter containing an JSON array, which would be unpacked at the database and queried via the standard means. This resolves #13617, which is a long-standing, highly-voted performance issue.Done in 8.0
Done in 9.0
Backlog
Related issues
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: