Entity Framework: Update-Database Migrates the Wrong DB

Recently I made the switch from using Visual Studio 2015 to using Visual Studio 2017. For the most part the transition was easy. However, I ran into an issue with Entity Framework updating the wrong database. I’m posting the solution here so I don’t forget ūüôā

TL:DR
If you are experiencing issues with Entity Framework then check that your startup project is the correct one.

EF Update-Database Is Not Working

My current setup involves using a local SQL Server Express database. I check the database via SQL Server Management Studio (ManStu) when I run Update-Database to ensure my changes take place. When I run Update-Database from Visual Studio 2015 the changes are reflected in the database. When I run Update-Database from Visual Studio 2017 the changes are not reflected in the database.

Why does Update-Database work correctly in Visual Studio 2015 but not correctly in Visual Studio 2017? Why does Visual Studio 2017 tell me that the changes were applied successfully?

I decided to take a look at the output of Update-Database -Verbose to see if it yielded any helpful information. There I saw:

Target database is: 'MySpecialDB' (DataSource: (localdb)\v11.0, Provider: System.Data.SqlClient, Origin: Convention).

Entity Framework was using (localdb) and not the SQL Server Express database I setup in the app.config. That explains why the changes were applied successfully. However, why was Entity Framework using the wrong database?

The Not So Thrilling Simple Solution

I pursued a number of different routes looking for the solution to this issue. In the end the solution is so simple. The wrong startup project was selected. That’s it. In Visual Studio 2015 I was using a different startup project. In Visual Studio 2017 I never setup a startup project and so one was selected automatically.

As it turns out Entity Framework pulls meaningful information (like database connection information) out of the startup project. The fact that I had the wrong startup project selected in Visual Studio 2017 was the reason why my Entity Framework Update-Database commands were not working the way I expected.

So, lesson learned, if you are experiencing issues with Entity Framework then check your startup project. It could be that you have the wrong startup project selected ūüôā

Fixing UI-SREF-ACTIVE – Specifying a Default Abstract State

I’ve recently begun working with Angular and by extension Angular UI-Router. The fact that you are reading this means that you likely have as well. That said, let’s all pause for a moment and cry together. I know it’s hard. You will get through it. It will be ok. We can do this.

Basic ui-sref-active Usage

One of the things that UI-Router gives you is the ability to add a class to an element if that elements state is currently active. This is done via the ui-sref-active directive.


<ul class="nav navbar-nav" ng-controller="navController">
   
   <li class="nav-node nav" ui-sref-active="active"><a ui-sref="home">Home</a></li>

   <li class="nav-node nav" ui-sref-active="active"><a ui-sref="notHome">Not Home</a></li>

</ul>

So above we have some basic navigation with two states. The home state and the notHome state. The ui-sref-active directive takes care of adding the active class to whichever li contains the state that is currently active.

The Problem with Abstract States

The problem is that the ui-sref-active directive does not work correctly (or as we expect) when the parent state is an abstract state.

Let’s say you want to expand your “home” state a bit. Maybe you want to add a “dashboard” state and from there link to a “messages” state. You might set up your $stateProvider a bit like this.

$stateProvider
	.state("home",
	{
		abstract: true,
		url: "/home"
	})
	.state("home.dashboard", {
		url: "/dashboard",
		views: {
			"content@": {
				templateUrl: "app/home/dashboard.html",
				controller: "DashboardController"
			}
		}
	})
   .state("home.messages", {
		url: "/messages",
		views: {
			"content@": {
				templateUrl: "app/home/messages.html",
				controller: "MessagesController"
			}
		}
	});

You’ll see we’ve setup home as an abstract view. By default we want to land on our home.dashboard state. We also want ui-sref-active¬†to set the active class on our “Home” link regardless of which child state we are on.


<ul class="nav navbar-nav" ng-controller="navController">
   
   <li class="nav-node nav" ui-sref-active="active"><a ui-sref="home.dashboard">Home</a></li>


   <li class="nav-node nav" ui-sref-active="active"><a ui-sref="notHome">Not Home</a></li>

</ul>

You will notice that in the code above we are now using ui-sref¬†to link to ¬†home.dashboard. This is where the problem with ui-sref-active crops up, it will only show the active class if the state is home.dashboard. We want the active class to appear on any child of the “home” state. As it is, the ui-sref-active directive will not detect home.messages¬†as active. So the question becomes, “how can we fix ui-sref-active¬†so that it detects a parent abstract state”?

Fixing ui-sref-active

The answer comes from Tom Grant in the form of a comment on a GitHub issue.

Tom informs us that there is an undocumented built in solution to this ui-sref-active¬†problem. The solution, he says, is to “use an object (like with ng-class) and it will work”.

Code examples that Tom provides:

<!-- This will not work -->
<li ui-sref-active="active">
   <a ui-sref="admin.users">Administration Panel</a>
</li>

<!-- This will work -->
<li ui-sref-active="{ 'active': 'admin' }">
   <a ui-sref="admin.users">Administration Panel</a>
</li>

That’s it. Now we can link to children of abstract ui-router states and ui-sref-active¬†will behave the way we expect it should.