Geeks With Blogs


This blog has moved to

 Subscribe in a reader

Add to Google Reader or Homepage

View my teams slideshare
These postings are provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confer no rights.

IUpdateable has moved to Please visit

[I haven’t done QandAs for a long while – very remiss of me.]

Anyway, I have been asked this one so many times lately that I felt a more public answer was needed.

The short answer is: Mostly. Certainly it is good enough to get work done.

The longer answer is below…


In the first version of Entity Framework (which came with .NET Framework 3.5 SP1), the Entity Framework Designer was… bad. I mean very bad. I mean dumbly bad. We had a decent enough runtime but the design surface just wasn’t up to the job, instead hiding away much of the capabilities of the Entity Framework as well as just poorly supporting the lifecycle of an EDM.

Many folks needed to either directly edit the underlying xml file (.edmx) or switch to their own tooling or alternative products such as the Devart Entity Developer. This was a huge shame and IMHO (and in my experience) the designer proved to be a huge factor in turning some folks away from the Entity Framework.

Hence, we have waited with crossed fingers to see what Visual Studio 2010 brings.

Visual Studio 2010 Beta 2 brought us…

Well, at first glance it brought us the same designer… because it is fundamentally the same designer.

But this time around the team have had a chance to:

  • Remove most of the rough edges
  • Add functionality into the designer to support more of the capabilities of the runtime

There is a lot of good improvements in the designer such as support for Model First, Complex Types, Templated code gen, Stored Procedure, Pluralization/Singularization plus much improved search and delete capabilities. (Check out the appropriate section of my list).

However, there are still (as of Beta 2) many missing capabilities in the designer including

  • Multiple entity sets per type.
  • Creating entity sets for non-root types.
  • Table-per-concrete class mapping.
  • Using EntityType properties in mapping conditions.
  • Unmapped abstract types. When you create an abstract entity type with the Entity Designer, the type must be mapped to a table or view.
  • Creating conditions on association mappings.
  • Mapping associations directly to stored procedures. Mapping many-to-many associations is not supported. You can indirectly map other associations to stored procedures along with entity types by mapping the appropriate navigation properties to stored procedure parameters.
  • Creating conditions on Function Import mappings.
  • Annotations.
  • Query views.
  • Models that contain references to other models.
  • Creating associations without corresponding navigation properties.
  • Adding or editing storage model objects. (Deleting storage model objects is supported.)
  • Adding, editing, or deleting functions that are defined in the conceptual model.

The above list is pulled straight from the documentation. In some ways it is a list that actually reflects just how powerful the runtime now is, however that can not disguise the fact that the designer is still playing catch-up with the runtime.

I would add to the above the following none exhaustive list:

  • “Odd” way of working with complex types across Entities
  • Model First requiring a database connection
  • Model First not allowing mapping before first schema gen
  • Model First is destructive on generate
  • Lack of support for very large models/schemas
  • Lack of versioning support
  • Lack of support for team development of a model
  • Lack of granularity of operations e.g. just re-generate the mapping of a single entity (or exclude an entity)

Overall, the designer in .NET 4 is a welcome improvement to what we get in v1 and is certainly now a useful tool for working with EDMs. But… there is still plenty of room for improvement.

Posted on Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:25 PM .NET 4.0 , Data , Entity Framework , Q&A | Back to top

Comments on this post: QandA: Is the ADO.NET Entity Data Model designer fixed in .NET 4?

# re: QandA: Is the ADO.NET Entity Data Model designer fixed in .NET 4?
Requesting Gravatar...
I've finally had a chance to take EF 4.0 for a spin, and I can say without a doubt, it's still a pile of junk compared to the alternatives.

1. The designer is still not up to snuff. Example: Make a FK field nullable, and the designer doesn't pick up (after a schema update) that the relationship should now be a 0...1 instead of 1.

2. I'm working with SQLCE 3.5 and I'm using identity pk's...which I rudely found out are _STILL_ not supported by EF:

{System.NotSupportedException: Server-generated keys and server-generated values are not supported by SQL Server Compact.

3. It appears that there's no simple way to set a FK field value on an associated object without re-querying the database. Let me explain - let's say we have an Order entity that has a StatusId FK that references a Status table. I want to simply say order.StatusId=12345 because I know what the right value is. I have not found a way to do this. I wound up just re-querying the database to get the Status object and assign it to the order.

Come on Microsoft. How could you guys even release this as a beta?

You can reach me at giorgio @ giorgio galante dot com.
Left by Extremely Dissappointed on Nov 25, 2009 8:46 PM

# re: QandA: Is the ADO.NET Entity Data Model designer fixed in .NET 4?
Requesting Gravatar...
Thanks Giogio. I will take a look at these and feedback to product group.

I think we both agree with my fina line "still room for improvement"
Left by Eric on Nov 26, 2009 10:07 AM

Your comment:
 (will show your gravatar)

Copyright © Eric Nelson | Powered by: