I was looking for something more generic.. Putting group by clause in my queries does not solve this problem - one could have, say, 5 collections. Afair new linq implementation will allow for joins so it will be easy enough to join a subquery with collection(s) count. I will stick with SQL and named querries for now.
Fabio, Oscar, thanks for your help. On Oct 29, 1:42 pm, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > Good alternative... > Michal, as you can see, to have a good solution people need a better > explanation. ;) > -- > Fabio Maulo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
