Home/ Questions/Q 8982797
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-06-15T20:40:06+00:00

I have the below scenario. I am using EF 5 Code first, MVC 4

  • 0

I have the below scenario. I am using EF 5 Code first, MVC 4 on VS 2010. I am using the Unit of Work and Repository pattern for my project.

I am not sure if this is possible or not. Kindly suggest.

I have a model class representing a database table. In the model class, I have a property that is decorated as [NotMapped]. I have a Stored Proc that returns data, similar to the model class. However, when I get the data in a List from the SP, it does not contain value for the [NotMapped] column (SP returns data for the [NotMapped] column though). This may be logically correct with respect to EF.

All I want to know is, do we have a way to get data populated for the [NotMapped] column. I want to achieve, CRUD using LINQ (excluding R – Read).

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    I would recommend to create a separate complex type for the stored procedure results. Otherwise sooner or later you will find yourself writing code to distinguish between entities coming from the DbSet or from the stored procedure. When the come from the stored procedure they can’t be used in joins, for example. Or checks whether or not the unmapped property is set.

    A very dirty approach could be to have two different contexts. With code first it is possible to have different contexts with different mappings to the same types, with and without the column ignored (if you use fluent mapping, not with data annotations). But that only succeeds if you tell EF not to check the database schema, so using migrations is ruled out as well. I would not do it!! For the same reason as I mentioned above. I would hate to have a type with a property that sometimes is and sometimes isn’t set.

    • 0