6

Usually the distinction between LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Objects isn't much of an issue, but how can I determine which is happening?

It would be useful to know when writing the code, but I fear one can only be sure at run time sometimes.

Protector one
  • 6,926
  • 5
  • 62
  • 86
  • 3
    Well, not specifically LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Objects... but typically if you have an `IEnumerable`, operations will use LINQ to Objects, but if you have an `IQueryable`, operations will use "something else". (Of course, `AsQueryable` will wrap an `IEnumerable` into `IQueryable`, so it's not 100%...) What kind of thing are you actually looking for? – Jon Skeet Sep 05 '16 at 08:42
  • 1
    If it's `IQueryable`, treat it with caution. You can always use `AsEnumerable()` to opt for an in-memory processing, but you have to be aware of the implications (loading all data into memory). – haim770 Sep 05 '16 at 08:48
  • "if you have an IQueryable, operations will use 'something else'" What kind of something else?? And how can you know for sure? Are we just expected to let the computer handle all these things without our complete understanding? – Protector one Sep 05 '16 at 08:55
  • 1
    @Protectorone: Well this is just an abstraction... the idea is you usually don't need to know. What would you do with the knowledge that it was LINQ to SQL vs EF, for example? (Again, this is where being clearer in the question about how you want to determine what information and what you want to do with that information would be helpful.) – Jon Skeet Sep 05 '16 at 09:01
  • @Jon: I guess I don't understand these concepts well enough to make my question clearer. I thought I was asking about when a LINQ query was going to be converted to SQL and executed on the database, vs. being handled by compiled C# code on in-memory objects. – Protector one Sep 05 '16 at 09:06
  • @Protectorone: Right, and I'm saying there are multiple different SQL providers for LINQ, and also non-SQL providers. (Maybe your query is converted into LDAP, for example.) And it's still not clear what your context is - where are you writing code that needs to care, but where it isn't obvious in the context?# – Jon Skeet Sep 05 '16 at 09:09
  • @Jon: It's not the code that needs to care, it's me. I've been having performance issues with LINQ queries, and I want to know exactly when they're being handled by the database. It's not a particular problem I'm trying to solve; its about educating myself for similar problems yet to appear in my life. – Protector one Sep 05 '16 at 09:15
  • 1
    Then that sounds like it's a matter of learning more about how LINQ works, rather than something your *code* needs to deal with, which is the implication of your final sentence. You might want to read some parts of my Edulinq blogs series: https://codeblog.jonskeet.uk/category/edulinq/ But I'm not sure what a good answer to your post would look like at the moment... – Jon Skeet Sep 05 '16 at 09:21

4 Answers4

3

It's not micro optimization to make the distinction between Linq-To-Sql and Linq-To-Objects. The latter requires all data to be loaded into memory before you start filtering it. Of course, that can be a major issue.

Most LINQ methods are using deferred execution, which means that it's just building the query but it's not yet executed (like Select or Where). Few others are executing the query and materialize the result into an in-memory collection (like ToLIst or ToArray). If you use AsEnumerable you are also using Linq-To-Objects and no SQL is generated for the parts after it, which means that the data must be loaded into memory (yet still using deferred execution).

So consider the following two queries. The first selects and filters in the database:

var queryLondonCustomers = from cust in db.customers
                           where cust.City == "London"
                           select cust;

whereas the second selects all and filters via Linq-To-Objects:

var queryLondonCustomers = from cust in db.customers.AsEnumerable()
                           where cust.City == "London"
                           select cust;

The latter has one advantage: you can use any .NET method since it doesn't need to be translated to SQL (e.g. !String.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(cust.City)).

If you just get something that is an IEnumerable<T>, you can't be sure if it's actually a query or already an in-memory object. Even the try-cast to IQueryable<T> will not tell you for sure what it actually is because of the AsQueryable-method. Maybe you could try-cast it to a collection type. If the cast succeeds you can be sure that it's already materialized but otherwise it doesn't tell you if it's using Linq-To-Sql or Linq-To-Objects:

bool isMaterialized = queryLondonCustomers as ICollection<Customer> != null;

Related: EF ICollection Vs List Vs IEnumerable Vs IQueryable

Community
  • 1
  • 1
Tim Schmelter
  • 450,073
  • 74
  • 686
  • 939
  • 1
    Maybe it's worth adding that `AsEnumerable()` doesn't *immediately* execute the query. Deferred Execution is still preserved so you can further add `Select()`, `Where()` but they'll be intercepted by Linq to Objects *eventually*. – haim770 Sep 05 '16 at 08:52
  • @Protectorone, No. It's not the same. `AsEnumerable()` doesn't materialize the query (see http://referencesource.microsoft.com/#System.Core/System/Linq/Enumerable.cs,825). – haim770 Sep 05 '16 at 08:53
  • "you can't be sure if it's actually a query or already an in-memory object" We can't? Really?? And we're supposed to be OK with that? It makes me feel ignorant or lazy… – Protector one Sep 05 '16 at 09:00
3

The first solution comes into my mind is checking the query provider.

If the query is materialized, which means the data is loaded into memory, EnumerableQuery(T) is used. Otherwise, a special query provider is used, for example, System.Data.Entity.Internal.Linq.DbQueryProvider for entityframework.

var materialized = query
                  .AsQueryable()
                  .Provider
                  .GetType()
                  .GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(EnumerableQuery<>);

However the above are ideal cases because someone can implement a custom query provider behaves like EnumerableQuery.

Cheng Chen
  • 42,509
  • 16
  • 113
  • 174
2

I had the same question, for different reasons.

Judging purely on your title & initial description (which is why google search brought me here).

Pre compilation, given an instance that implements IQueryable, there's no way to know the implementation behind the interface.

At runtime, you need to check the instance's Provider property like @Danny Chen mentioned.

public enum LinqProvider
{
    Linq2SQL, Linq2Objects
}

public static class LinqProviderExtensions
{
    public static LinqProvider LinqProvider(this IQueryable query)
    {

        if (query.Provider.GetType().IsGenericType && query.Provider.GetType().GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(EnumerableQuery<>))
            return LinqProvider.Linq2Objects;
        if (typeof(ICollection<>).MakeGenericType(query.ElementType).IsAssignableFrom(query.GetType()))
            return LinqProvider.Linq2Objects;

        return LinqProvider.Linq2SQL;
    }
}

In our case, we are adding additional filters dynamically, but ran into issues with different handling of case-sensitivity/nullreference handling on different providers. Hence, at runtime we had to tweak the filters that we add based on the type of provider, and ended up adding this extension method:

2

Using EF core in net core 6

To see if the provider is an EF provider, use the following code:

if (queryable.Provider is Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Query.Internal.EntityQueryProvider)
{
    // Queryable is backed by EF and is not an in-memory/client-side queryable.
}

One could get the opposite by testing the provider against System.Linq.EnumerableQuery (base type of EnumerableQuery<T> - so you don't have to test generics).

This is useful if you have methods like EF.Functions.Like(...) which can only be executed in the database - and you want to branch to something else in case of client-side execution.

sommmen
  • 6,570
  • 2
  • 30
  • 51
  • This kind of branching can be really useful when in DB "==" considers "é", "e" the same letter, but in-memory data don't. – Master DJon Feb 16 '23 at 06:14