An enum property isn't mapped to the PostgreSQL enum inside value objects

[YohDeadfall]

The problem occurs only for value objects inside complex objects. The following example maps PhoneNumberType to int:

public enum PhoneNumberType
{
    Mobile,
    Home,
    Work
}

public class PhoneNumber
{
    public PhoneNumberType Type { get; set; }
    public int Number { get; set; }
}

public class Contact
{
    public PhoneNumber Phone { get; set; }
}

builder.OwnsOne(e => e.Phone).Property(p => p.Type);
builder.OwnsOne(e => e.Phone).Property(p => p.Number);

[austindrenski]

@YohDeadfall Do you mind if I wrap this into #605 which attempts to address some other enum edge cases?

[YohDeadfall]

I think that such changes should be made by separate pull requests. One issue - one request. But let's leave it as is this time.

[austindrenski]

@YohDeadfall When I read this earlier, I thought there might be some overlap, but I was indeed mistaken. Once #605 is merged, I'll take a look at this one separately.

[roji]

I'm going to add this to 2.2.0 for now, hoping we can fix it by the time we release.

[austindrenski]

FYI starting to look into this now.

Notes

• This looks similar to Translation skipped for array accessed by relationship #651. The triage for that issue notes that it could be reproduced without an owned entity using just a one-to-one relationship.
  • [ ] Test whether or not this can be reproduced with a simple one-to-one relationship.

[austindrenski]

Actually, I can't reproduce this in the test suite. The 2.2 release notes do reference changes to owned type behavior, so it's possible that this was simply resolved upstream.

@YohDeadfall Here's the setup I used to try and reproduce this. Does the configuration look right? Are you still able to reproduce this locally?

[Fact]
public void Where_with_owned_type()
{
    using (var ctx = Fixture.CreateContext())
    {
        var _ = ctx.SomeEntities.Single(e => e.OwnedTypeWithEnum.MappedEnum == MappedEnum.Happy);

        AssertContainsInSql("WHERE e.\"OwnedTypeWithEnum_MappedEnum\" = 'happy'::test.mapped_enum");
    }
}

public class SomeEnumEntity
{
    public int Id { get; set; }
    public MappedEnum MappedEnum { get; set; }
    public UnmappedEnum UnmappedEnum { get; set; }
    public InferredEnum InferredEnum { get; set; }
    public SchemaQualifiedEnum SchemaQualifiedEnum { get; set; }
    public int EnumValue { get; set; }

    public OwnedTypeWithEnum OwnedTypeWithEnum { get; set; }
}

public class OwnedTypeWithEnum
{
    public MappedEnum MappedEnum { get; set; }
    public UnmappedEnum UnmappedEnum { get; set; }
    public InferredEnum InferredEnum { get; set; }
    public SchemaQualifiedEnum SchemaQualifiedEnum { get; set; }
    public int EnumValue { get; set; }
}

protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder builder)
{
    builder.ForNpgsqlHasEnum("mapped_enum", new[] { "happy", "sad" })
           .ForNpgsqlHasEnum<InferredEnum>()
           .HasDefaultSchema("test")
           .ForNpgsqlHasEnum<SchemaQualifiedEnum>();

    builder.Entity<SomeEnumEntity>().OwnsOne(x => x.OwnedTypeWithEnum);
}

Note that I tested this in a branch following #685, so the schema handling may look different from the current dev branch.

[YohDeadfall]

We have moved out from EF for the current project (: Will check it when I have half an hour to spare.

[roji]

@YohDeadfall hope it's nothing bad with EF :) Do you want to continue being active and reviewing EF stuff or only Npgsql?

[YohDeadfall]

It's very limited for our goals and too slow in comparison with pure Npgsql and SQL, but we will continue to use it for migrations only which are written in plain SQL (: Yes, I want to work on EF too, but currently I'm busy with the presentation I mentioned in person. It covers npgsql/npgsql#2180.

[roji]

OK, great - we can also use your work to write that page on migrating from MSSQL. Good luck with the presentation!

[YohDeadfall]

Looks like I've omitted some part that triggers the problem or most likely had an issue in the application... Closing as I can't reproduce it too. Thanks for taking a look!