Merging dictionaries in C#

Question

What's the best way to merge 2 or more dictionaries (Dictionary<TKey, TValue>) in C#? (3.0 features like LINQ are fine).

I'm thinking of a method signature along the lines of:

public static Dictionary<TKey,TValue>
                 Merge<TKey,TValue>(Dictionary<TKey,TValue>[] dictionaries);

or

public static Dictionary<TKey,TValue>
                 Merge<TKey,TValue>(IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey,TValue>> dictionaries);

Regarding the handling of duplicate keys: In case of collision, it doesn't matter which value is saved to the dictionary as long as it's consistent.

Answer 1

This partly depends on what you want to happen if you run into duplicates. For instance, you could do:

var result = dictionaries.SelectMany(dict => dict)
                         .ToDictionary(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value);

That will throw an exception if you get any duplicate keys.

EDIT: If you use ToLookup then you'll get a lookup which can have multiple values per key. You could then convert that to a dictionary:

var result = dictionaries.SelectMany(dict => dict)
                         .ToLookup(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value)
                         .ToDictionary(group => group.Key, group => group.First());

It's a bit ugly - and inefficient - but it's the quickest way to do it in terms of code. (I haven't tested it, admittedly.)

You could write your own ToDictionary2 extension method of course (with a better name, but I don't have time to think of one now) - it's not terribly hard to do, just overwriting (or ignoring) duplicate keys. The important bit (to my mind) is using SelectMany, and realising that a dictionary supports iteration over its key/value pairs.

Answer 2

I would do it like this:

dictionaryFrom.ToList().ForEach(x => dictionaryTo.Add(x.Key, x.Value));

Simple and easy. According to this blog post it's even faster than most loops as its underlying implementation accesses elements by index rather than enumerator (see this answer).

It will of course throw an exception if there are duplicates, so you'll have to check before merging.

Answer 3

This doesn't explode if there are multiple keys ("righter" keys replace "lefter" keys), can merge a number of dictionaries (if desired) and preserves the type (with the restriction that it requires a meaningful default public constructor):

public static class DictionaryExtensions
{
    // Works in C#3/VS2008:
    // Returns a new dictionary of this ... others merged leftward.
    // Keeps the type of 'this', which must be default-instantiable.
    // Example: 
    //   result = map.MergeLeft(other1, other2, ...)
    public static T MergeLeft<T,K,V>(this T me, params IDictionary<K,V>[] others)
        where T : IDictionary<K,V>, new()
    {
        T newMap = new T();
        foreach (IDictionary<K,V> src in
            (new List<IDictionary<K,V>> { me }).Concat(others)) {
            // ^-- echk. Not quite there type-system.
            foreach (KeyValuePair<K,V> p in src) {
                newMap[p.Key] = p.Value;
            }
        }
        return newMap;
    }

}

Answer 4

The trivial solution would be:

using System.Collections.Generic;
...
public static Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
    Merge<TKey,TValue>(IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey, TValue>> dictionaries)
{
    var result = new Dictionary<TKey, TValue>();
    foreach (var dict in dictionaries)
        foreach (var x in dict)
            result[x.Key] = x.Value;
    return result;
}

Answer 5

I'm very late to the party and perhaps missing something, but if either there are no duplicate keys or, as the OP says, "In case of collision, it doesn't matter which value is saved to the dict as long as it's consistent," what's wrong with this one (merging D2 into D1)?

foreach (KeyValuePair<string,int> item in D2)
{
    D1[item.Key] = item.Value;
}

It seems simple enough, maybe too simple, I wonder if I'm missing something. This is what I'm using in some code where I know there are no duplicate keys. I'm still in testing, though, so I'd love to know now if I'm overlooking something, instead of finding out later.

Answer 6

Try the following

static Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
    Merge<TKey, TValue>(this IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey, TValue>> enumerable)
{
    return enumerable.SelectMany(x => x).ToDictionary(x => x.Key, y => y.Value);
}

Answer 7

Dictionary<String, String> allTables = new Dictionary<String, String>();
allTables = tables1.Union(tables2).ToDictionary(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value);

Answer 8

Option 1 : This depends on what you want to happen if you are sure that you don't have duplicate key in both dictionaries. than you could do:

var result = dictionary1.Union(dictionary2).ToDictionary(k => k.Key, v => v.Value)

Note : This will throw error if you get any duplicate keys in dictionaries.

Option 2 : If you can have duplicate key then you'll have to handle duplicate key with the using of where clause.

var result = dictionary1.Union(dictionary2.Where(k => !dictionary1.ContainsKey(k.Key))).ToDictionary(k => k.Key, v => v.Value)

Note : It will not get duplicate key. if there will be any duplicate key than it will get dictionary1's key.

Option 3 : If you want to use ToLookup. then you will get a lookup which can have multiple values per key. You could convert that lookup to a dictionary:

var result = dictionaries.SelectMany(dict => dict)
                         .ToLookup(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value)
                         .ToDictionary(group => group.Key, group => group.First());

Answer 9

Here is a helper function I use:

using System.Collections.Generic;
namespace HelperMethods
{
    public static class MergeDictionaries
    {
        public static void Merge<TKey, TValue>(this IDictionary<TKey, TValue> first, IDictionary<TKey, TValue> second)
        {
            if (second == null || first == null) return;
            foreach (var item in second) 
                if (!first.ContainsKey(item.Key)) 
                    first.Add(item.Key, item.Value);
        }
    }
}

Answer 10

The following works for me. If there are duplicates, it will use dictA's value.

public static IDictionary<TKey, TValue> Merge<TKey, TValue>(this IDictionary<TKey, TValue> dictA, IDictionary<TKey, TValue> dictB)
    where TValue : class
{
    return dictA.Keys.Union(dictB.Keys).ToDictionary(k => k, k => dictA.ContainsKey(k) ? dictA[k] : dictB[k]);
}

Answer 11

Based on the answers above, but adding a Func-parameter to let the caller handle the duplicates:

public static Dictionary<TKey, TValue> Merge<TKey, TValue>(this IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey, TValue>> dicts, 
                                                           Func<IGrouping<TKey, TValue>, TValue> resolveDuplicates)
{
    if (resolveDuplicates == null)
        resolveDuplicates = new Func<IGrouping<TKey, TValue>, TValue>(group => group.First());

    return dicts.SelectMany<Dictionary<TKey, TValue>, KeyValuePair<TKey, TValue>>(dict => dict)
                .ToLookup(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value)
                .ToDictionary(group => group.Key, group => resolveDuplicates(group));
}

Answer 12

How about adding a params overload?

Also, you should type them as IDictionary for maximum flexibility.

public static IDictionary<TKey, TValue> Merge<TKey, TValue>(IEnumerable<IDictionary<TKey, TValue>> dictionaries)
{
    // ...
}

public static IDictionary<TKey, TValue> Merge<TKey, TValue>(params IDictionary<TKey, TValue>[] dictionaries)
{
    return Merge((IEnumerable<TKey, TValue>) dictionaries);
}

Answer 13

The party's pretty much dead now, but here's an "improved" version of user166390 that made its way into my extension library. Apart from some details, I added a delegate to calculate the merged value.

/// <summary>
/// Merges a dictionary against an array of other dictionaries.
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="TResult">The type of the resulting dictionary.</typeparam>
/// <typeparam name="TKey">The type of the key in the resulting dictionary.</typeparam>
/// <typeparam name="TValue">The type of the value in the resulting dictionary.</typeparam>
/// <param name="source">The source dictionary.</param>
/// <param name="mergeBehavior">A delegate returning the merged value. (Parameters in order: The current key, The current value, The previous value)</param>
/// <param name="mergers">Dictionaries to merge against.</param>
/// <returns>The merged dictionary.</returns>
public static TResult MergeLeft<TResult, TKey, TValue>(
    this TResult source,
    Func<TKey, TValue, TValue, TValue> mergeBehavior,
    params IDictionary<TKey, TValue>[] mergers)
    where TResult : IDictionary<TKey, TValue>, new()
{
    var result = new TResult();
    var sources = new List<IDictionary<TKey, TValue>> { source }
        .Concat(mergers);

    foreach (var kv in sources.SelectMany(src => src))
    {
        TValue previousValue;
        result.TryGetValue(kv.Key, out previousValue);
        result[kv.Key] = mergeBehavior(kv.Key, kv.Value, previousValue);
    }

    return result;
}

Answer 14

Considering the performance of dictionary key lookups and deletes since they are hash operations, and considering the wording of the question was best way, I think that below is a perfectly valid approach, and the others are a bit over-complicated, IMHO.

    public static void MergeOverwrite<T1, T2>(this IDictionary<T1, T2> dictionary, IDictionary<T1, T2> newElements)
    {
        if (newElements == null) return;

        foreach (var e in newElements)
        {
            dictionary.Remove(e.Key); //or if you don't want to overwrite do (if !.Contains()
            dictionary.Add(e);
        }
    }

OR if you're working in a multithreaded application and your dictionary needs to be thread safe anyway, you should be doing this:

    public static void MergeOverwrite<T1, T2>(this ConcurrentDictionary<T1, T2> dictionary, IDictionary<T1, T2> newElements)
    {
        if (newElements == null || newElements.Count == 0) return;

        foreach (var ne in newElements)
        {
            dictionary.AddOrUpdate(ne.Key, ne.Value, (key, value) => value);
        }
    }

You could then wrap this to make it handle an enumeration of dictionaries. Regardless, you're looking at about ~O(3n) (all conditions being perfect), since the .Add() will do an additional, unnecessary but practically free, Contains() behind the scenes. I don't think it gets much better.

If you wanted to limit extra operations on large collections, you should sum up the Count of each dictionary you're about to merge and set the capacity of the the target dictionary to that, which avoids the later cost of resizing. So, end product is something like this...

    public static IDictionary<T1, T2> MergeAllOverwrite<T1, T2>(IList<IDictionary<T1, T2>> allDictionaries)
    {
        var initSize = allDictionaries.Sum(d => d.Count);
        var resultDictionary = new Dictionary<T1, T2>(initSize);
        allDictionaries.ForEach(resultDictionary.MergeOverwrite);
        return resultDictionary;
    }

Note that I took in an IList<T> to this method... mostly because if you take in an IEnumerable<T>, you've opened yourself up to multiple enumerations of the same set, which can be very costly if you got your collection of dictionaries from a deferred LINQ statement.

Answer 15

Simplified again from earlier without LINQ and a bool default of non-destructive merge if existing or overwrite entirely if true rather than using an enum. It still suits my own needs without any fancier code ever being required:

using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;

public static partial class Extensions
{
    public static void Merge<K, V>(this IDictionary<K, V> target, 
                                   IDictionary<K, V> source, 
                                   bool overwrite = false)
    {
        foreach (KeyValuePair _ in source)
            if (overwrite || !target.ContainsKey(_.Key))
                target[_.Key] = _.Value;
    }
}

Answer 16

Note that if you use an extension method called 'Add', you get to use collection initializers to combine as many dictionaries as needed like this:

public static void Add<K, V>(this Dictionary<K, V> d, Dictionary<K, V> other) {
  foreach (var kvp in other)
  {
    if (!d.ContainsKey(kvp.Key))
    {
      d.Add(kvp.Key, kvp.Value);
    }
  }
}


var s0 = new Dictionary<string, string> {
  { "A", "X"}
};
var s1 = new Dictionary<string, string> {
  { "A", "X" },
  { "B", "Y" }
};
// Combine as many dictionaries and key pairs as needed
var a = new Dictionary<string, string> {
  s0, s1, s0, s1, s1, { "C", "Z" }
};

Answer 17

using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;

public static class DictionaryExtensions
{
    public enum MergeKind { SkipDuplicates, OverwriteDuplicates }
    public static void Merge<K, V>(this IDictionary<K, V> target, IDictionary<K, V> source, MergeKind kind = MergeKind.SkipDuplicates) =>
        source.ToList().ForEach(_ => { if (kind == MergeKind.OverwriteDuplicates || !target.ContainsKey(_.Key)) target[_.Key] = _.Value; });
}

You can either skip/ignore (default) or overwrite the duplicates: And Bob's your uncle provided you are not overly fussy about Linq performance but prefer instead concise maintainable code as I do: in which case you can remove the default MergeKind.SkipDuplicates to enforce a choice for the caller and make the developer cognisant of what the results will be!

Answer 18

@Tim: Should be a comment, but comments don't allow for code editing.

Dictionary<string, string> t1 = new Dictionary<string, string>();
t1.Add("a", "aaa");
Dictionary<string, string> t2 = new Dictionary<string, string>();
t2.Add("b", "bee");
Dictionary<string, string> t3 = new Dictionary<string, string>();
t3.Add("c", "cee");
t3.Add("d", "dee");
t3.Add("b", "bee");
Dictionary<string, string> merged = t1.MergeLeft(t2, t2, t3);

Note: I applied the modification by @ANeves to the solution by @Andrew Orsich, so the MergeLeft looks like this now:

public static Dictionary<K, V> MergeLeft<K, V>(this Dictionary<K, V> me, params IDictionary<K, V>[] others)
    {
        var newMap = new Dictionary<K, V>(me, me.Comparer);
        foreach (IDictionary<K, V> src in
            (new List<IDictionary<K, V>> { me }).Concat(others))
        {
            // ^-- echk. Not quite there type-system.
            foreach (KeyValuePair<K, V> p in src)
            {
                newMap[p.Key] = p.Value;
            }
        }
        return newMap;
    }

Answer 19

I know this is an old question, but since we now have LINQ you can do it in a single line like this

Dictionary<T1,T2> merged;
Dictionary<T1,T2> mergee;
mergee.ToList().ForEach(kvp => merged.Add(kvp.Key, kvp.Value));

or

mergee.ToList().ForEach(kvp => merged.Append(kvp));

Answer 20

Got scared to see complex answers, being new to C#.

Here are some simple answers.
Merging d1, d2, and so on.. dictionaries and handle any overlapping keys ("b" in below examples):

Example 1

{
    // 2 dictionaries,  "b" key is common with different values

    var d1 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "a", 10 }, { "b", 21 } };
    var d2 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "c", 30 }, { "b", 22 } };

    var result1 = d1.Concat(d2).GroupBy(ele => ele.Key).ToDictionary(ele => ele.Key, ele => ele.First().Value);
    // result1 is  a=10, b=21, c=30    That is, took the "b" value of the first dictionary

    var result2 = d1.Concat(d2).GroupBy(ele => ele.Key).ToDictionary(ele => ele.Key, ele => ele.Last().Value);
    // result2 is  a=10, b=22, c=30    That is, took the "b" value of the last dictionary
}

Example 2

{
    // 3 dictionaries,  "b" key is common with different values

    var d1 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "a", 10 }, { "b", 21 } };
    var d2 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "c", 30 }, { "b", 22 } };
    var d3 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "d", 40 }, { "b", 23 } };

    var result1 = d1.Concat(d2).Concat(d3).GroupBy(ele => ele.Key).ToDictionary(ele => ele.Key, ele => ele.First().Value);
    // result1 is  a=10, b=21, c=30, d=40    That is, took the "b" value of the first dictionary

    var result2 = d1.Concat(d2).Concat(d3).GroupBy(ele => ele.Key).ToDictionary(ele => ele.Key, ele => ele.Last().Value);
    // result2 is  a=10, b=23, c=30, d=40    That is, took the "b" value of the last dictionary
}

For more complex scenarios, see other answers.
Hope that helped.

Answer 21

A version from @user166390 answer with an added IEqualityComparer parameter to allow for case insensitive key comparison.

    public static T MergeLeft<T, K, V>(this T me, params Dictionary<K, V>[] others)
        where T : Dictionary<K, V>, new()
    {
        return me.MergeLeft(me.Comparer, others);
    }

    public static T MergeLeft<T, K, V>(this T me, IEqualityComparer<K> comparer, params Dictionary<K, V>[] others)
        where T : Dictionary<K, V>, new()
    {
        T newMap = Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(T), new object[] { comparer }) as T;

        foreach (Dictionary<K, V> src in 
            (new List<Dictionary<K, V>> { me }).Concat(others))
        {
            // ^-- echk. Not quite there type-system.
            foreach (KeyValuePair<K, V> p in src)
            {
                newMap[p.Key] = p.Value;
            }
        }
        return newMap;
    }

Answer 22

I'd split @orip's simple and non-garbage creating solution to provide a in-place AddAll() in addition to Merge() to handle the simple case of adding one dictionary to another.

using System.Collections.Generic;
...
public static Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
    AddAll<TKey,TValue>(Dictionary<TKey, TValue> dest, Dictionary<TKey, TValue> source)
{
    foreach (var x in source)
        dest[x.Key] = x.Value;
}

public static Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
    Merge<TKey,TValue>(IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey, TValue>> dictionaries)
{
    var result = new Dictionary<TKey, TValue>();
    foreach (var dict in dictionaries)
        result.AddAll(dict);
    return result;
}

Answer 23

This is my solution: it behaves like the dict.update() method in python.

public static class DictionaryExtensions
{
    public static void Update<K,V>(this IDictionary<K, V> me, IDictionary<K, V> other)
    {
        foreach (var x in other)
        {
            me[x.Key] = x.Value;
        }
    }
}

Answer 24

Merging using an extension method. It does not throw exception when there are duplicate keys, but replaces those keys with keys from the second dictionary.

internal static class DictionaryExtensions
{
    public static Dictionary<T1, T2> Merge<T1, T2>(this Dictionary<T1, T2> first, Dictionary<T1, T2> second)
    {
        if (first == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("first");
        if (second == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("second");

        var merged = new Dictionary<T1, T2>();
        first.ToList().ForEach(kv => merged[kv.Key] = kv.Value);
        second.ToList().ForEach(kv => merged[kv.Key] = kv.Value);

        return merged;
    }
}

Usage:

Dictionary<string, string> merged = first.Merge(second);

Answer 25

public static IDictionary<K, V> AddRange<K, V>(this IDictionary<K, V> one, IDictionary<K, V> two)
{
    foreach (var kvp in two)
    {
        if (one.ContainsKey(kvp.Key))
            one[kvp.Key] = two[kvp.Key];
        else
            one.Add(kvp.Key, kvp.Value);
    }
    return one;
}

Answer 26

Merging using an EqualityComparer that maps items for comparison to a different value/type. Here we will map from KeyValuePair (item type when enumerating a dictionary) to Key.

public class MappedEqualityComparer<T,U> : EqualityComparer<T>
{
    Func<T,U> _map;

    public MappedEqualityComparer(Func<T,U> map)
    {
        _map = map;
    }

    public override bool Equals(T x, T y)
    {
        return EqualityComparer<U>.Default.Equals(_map(x), _map(y));
    }

    public override int GetHashCode(T obj)
    {
        return _map(obj).GetHashCode();
    }
}

Usage:

// if dictA and dictB are of type Dictionary<int,string>
var dict = dictA.Concat(dictB)
                .Distinct(new MappedEqualityComparer<KeyValuePair<int,string>,int>(item => item.Key))
                .ToDictionary(item => item.Key, item=> item.Value);

Answer 27

or :

public static IDictionary<TKey, TValue> Merge<TKey, TValue>( IDictionary<TKey, TValue> x, IDictionary<TKey, TValue> y)
{
    return x
        .Except(x.Join(y, z => z.Key, z => z.Key, (a, b) => a))
        .Concat(y)
        .ToDictionary(z => z.Key, z => z.Value);
}

the result is a union where for duplicate entries "y" wins.

Answer 28

Try that

namespace Extensions
{
    public static class DictionaryExtensions
    {
        public static Dictionary<T, Y> MergeWith<T, Y>(this Dictionary<T, Y> dictA,
            Dictionary<T, Y> dictB)
        {
            foreach (var item in dictB)
            {
                if (dictA.ContainsKey(item.Key))
                    dictA[item.Key] = item.Value;
                else
                    dictA.Add(item.Key, item.Value);
            }
            return dictA;
        }
    }
}

When you want to merge two dictionaries

var d1 = new Dictionary<string, string>();
var d2 = new Dictionary<string, string>();
d1.MergeWith(d2);

Answer 29

Based on all the answers on this post, here's the most generic solution I could came up with.

I created 2 versions of the IDictionary.Merge() extension :

• Merge<T, U>(sourceLeft, sourceRight)
• Merge<T, U>(sourceLeft, sourceRight, Func<U, U, U> mergeExpression)

Where the second is a modified version of the first that lets you specify a lambda expression to handle duplicates like this :

Dictionary<string, object> customAttributes = 
  HtmlHelper
    .AnonymousObjectToHtmlAttributes(htmlAttributes)
    .ToDictionary(
      ca => ca.Key, 
      ca => ca.Value
    );

Dictionary<string, object> fixedAttributes = 
  new RouteValueDictionary(
    new { 
      @class = "form-control"
    }).ToDictionary(
      fa => fa.Key, 
      fa => fa.Value
    );

//appending the html class attributes
IDictionary<string, object> editorAttributes = fixedAttributes.Merge(customAttributes, (leftValue, rightValue) => leftValue + " " + rightValue);

(You can focus on the ToDictionary() and Merge() parts)

And here's the extension class (with 2 versions of the extension that take a collection of IDictionary on the right side):

  public static class IDictionaryExtension
  {
    public static IDictionary<T, U> Merge<T, U>(this IDictionary<T, U> sourceLeft, IDictionary<T, U> sourceRight)
    {
      IDictionary<T, U> result = new Dictionary<T,U>();

      sourceLeft
        .Concat(sourceRight)
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(kvp => 
          result[kvp.Key] = kvp.Value
        );

      return result;
    }

    public static IDictionary<T, U> Merge<T, U>(this IDictionary<T, U> sourceLeft, IDictionary<T, U> sourceRight, Func<U, U, U> mergeExpression)
    {
      IDictionary<T, U> result = new Dictionary<T,U>();

      //Merge expression example
      //(leftValue, rightValue) => leftValue + " " + rightValue;

      sourceLeft
        .Concat(sourceRight)
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(kvp => 
          result[kvp.Key] =
            (!result.ContainsKey(kvp.Key))
              ? kvp.Value
              : mergeExpression(result[kvp.Key], kvp.Value)
        );

      return result;
    }


    public static IDictionary<T, U> Merge<T, U>(this IDictionary<T, U> sourceLeft, IEnumerable<IDictionary<T, U>> sourcesRight)
    {
      IDictionary<T, U> result = new Dictionary<T, U>();
      
      new[] { sourceLeft }
        .Concat(sourcesRight)
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(dic =>
          result = result.Merge(dic)
        );

      return result;
    }

    public static IDictionary<T, U> Merge<T, U>(this IDictionary<T, U> sourceLeft, IEnumerable<IDictionary<T, U>> sourcesRight, Func<U, U, U> mergeExpression)
    {
      IDictionary<T, U> result = new Dictionary<T, U>();

      new[] { sourceLeft }
        .Concat(sourcesRight)
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(dic =>
          result = result.Merge(dic, mergeExpression)
        );

      return result;
    }
  }

The mergeExpression let's you easily handle the way you want to merge the items, like addition, division, multiplication or any kind of specific process you desire.

Note that I've not yet tested the collection versions of the extension... they may still require some tuning.

Also, the extension does NOT modify the original dictionaries, you'll have to assign it back if you want to.