I found that DJISDK requires:
the app user to agree bluetooth usage
update database and download it
then, the app can be registered (provided DJISDKAppKey is set properly in info.plist and so on).
My question is, why DJISDK need to update database and download it again?
What's the content of database?
It's a "fly safe" database, containing data about areas where one is not allowed to fly.
If the database is not included in the package (to reduce package size), it must be downloaded once the application starts.
The method you mentioned is for monitoring the progress of the download (because the database is not very small, downloading it can take some time).
Related
Let me get this out of the way right now: yes, it was almost certainly a mistake to not use Core Data. However, I was new to iOS development when I made these decisions, and I had no idea I'd be hamstrung like this. Moreover, the app is intended to also run on Android (eventually), so I avoided platform-specific APIs wherever possible.
I have an iOS app that stores data in a local SQLite database file. The data stored in the file is provided by the user, so it's important that it be kept safe. I had plans to "do this later", and later is now here. I am quickly coming to the realization that it won't be as straightforward as I had hoped...
I now understand that it won't be possible to seamlessly synchronize data across devices, and I'm willing to accept that limitation until I manage to migrate to Core Data. However, in the meantime I'd at least like the SQLite database to be backed up periodically so users can feel safe using the app on a single device. I was thinking I would do this:
periodically (e.g. once a week) copy the SQLite file from local storage into cloud storage, thus ensuring it is backed up
when the app starts, if the local store is missing or corrupted but the file exists in the cloud storage, ask the user if they would like to copy it over
The biggest problem with this approach is that the user could run the app on multiple devices and therefore the data stored in iCloud could be from any one of those devices, but only one. To combat that, I thought I could just use a per-device, unique name for the file in cloud storage. I would generate this using UIDevice.identifierForVendor.
So my startup logic would be:
Determine the unique name for the cloud file.
Is the local file missing or corrupted, and if so, does the cloud file exist?
2.1. Ask the user if they would like to restore from the cloud file. Make it really hard for them to say no because doing so will lose all their data.
2.2. If they say yes, copy the cloud file to the local file storage.
Open the local database file.
And running in the background I would occasionally copy the database file from local to cloud storage.
I would like to know whether this a sensible approach until I do Core Data integration. Also, are there any hidden "gotchas" that I'm perhaps missing?
UPDATE: as #TomHarrington pointed out in a comment, it turns out my database file is already sitting in /Documents, which is backed up to iTunes and any iCloud account. So my question morphs into this:
Should I simply ensure my database has a device-specific name so that it is not clobbered by the app running on another device connected to the same iCloud account?
I'm going to answer my question, since I ended up going down this path and finding a MASSIVE blocker. There is a bug in the UIDevice.identifierForVendor API that causes it to regenerate every time a new version of the app is installed! See here. This of course rules out using it as a device identifier. sigh
I think I'm SOL with that approach. Instead, I might generate a GUID on first execution and use that as my identifier. Problem is, I need to store that somewhere that isn't backed up to iCloud.
Ugh, I may just give up here and say my app can't be run on multiple devices until Core Data integration is done.
UPDATE: I ended up generating an identifier on first run and storing it in the keychain (as a local entry only so it isn't backed up to iCloud).
I’m trying to create an iPad app with information about architecture (buildings, cities, architects,…) but I don’t want to use internet connection. I would like to include all the data when building it so the user automatically gets everything when he downloads the app.
The user won’t be able to modify this data. The preferences will be stored separately. I have though that more data about, for example, other cities could be added with updates.
How should I do this?
Should I use Core Data?
I would like the data to be localizable and support at least two languages.
If your data has some structure to it (consistent fields, which seems likely) then CoreData can be a very good choice. You can put a .sqlite file in your application bundle as a resource, and have localized versions of it. Keep in mind though that any time your data changes you will have to push an app update, unless you write some code to extract the resource to the local storage, and to download new versions and update the data when necessary.
Newbie question.
I will need to have a data base from about 200 UIImages (single of them less than 500kb size) for iPad app. Customer want to have possibility to change set of this images from time to time without releasing new version of app in appstore and app must work without connection to the web (local data base on a device). I don't see how this can be done simultaneously, I see only one common option here:
Image data base would be stored on a server, what app customer will be able to change anytime. User will need to have web connection and every time he will start the application - existing data base will load into the app.
Main questions here:
is it possible to update data base on user's device without releasing new version of app and what data base managing system is more proper to this situation(SQLite, MySQL etc...)?
Q : is it possible to update data base on user's device without releasing new version of app?
A : Yes. It is possible.
SQLite will be perfect for you.
The photographs reside on the web server.
A number of start-off photographs may reside within the boundle so that the app is not really empty at start.
However, when downloading the app, the user must be online. In most cases he would still be online directly afterwards when he launches the app for the first time.
The server provides two services:
A quick one that just provides a version number of the
photo-database content and/or the date of the last change to the
photographs on the server.
The app frequently (not more than daily I would say) checks wether there are new images on the server or not.
If they are then the user is asked, whether he wants to download them.
If the user says YES then the app sends the version number and/or last date and/or IDs of all local photographs to the server and the
server provides the information about which photographs have been
added and where to download that very photograph and which have to
be deleted.
Then you add or delete or update the photographs from the download source given by the server. (That may well be an URL to the
very same server of course.)
For 200 data sets I would strongly suggest core data with SQLite - the standard stuff.
You may then think of holding the image data in the file system or in NSData properties within the database.
I've been having trouble getting an app submitted to the App Store. This is due to the fact that that database, which is updatable, is too large for the iCloud backup limitations. Most of the data in the db is static, but one table records the user's schedule for reviewing words (this is a vocabulary quiz).
As far as I can tell, I have two or three realistic options. The first is to put the whole database into the Library/Cache directory. This should be accepted, because it's not backed up to iCloud. However, there's no guarantee that it will be maintained during app updates, per this entry in "Make App Backups More Efficient" at this url:
http://developer.apple.com/library/IOs/#documentation/iPhone/Conceptual/iPhoneOSProgrammingGuide/PerformanceTuning/PerformanceTuning.html
Files Saved During App Updates
When a user downloads an app update, iTunes installs the update in a new app directory. It then moves the user’s data files from the old installation over to the new app directory before deleting the old installation. Files in the following directories are guaranteed to be preserved during the update process:
<Application_Home>/Documents
<Application_Home>/Library
Although files in other user directories may also be moved over, you should not rely on them being present after an update.
The second option is to put the data into the NSDocuments or NSLibrary directory, as mark it with the skipBackupFlag. However, one problem is this flag doesn't work for iOS 5.0 and previous per this entry in "How do I prevent files from being backed up to iCloud and iTunes?" at
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#qa/qa1719/_index.html
Important The new "do not back up" attribute will only be used by iOS 5.0.1 or later. On iOS 5.0 and earlier, applications will need to store their data in <Application_Home>/Library/Caches to avoid having it backed up. Since this attribute is ignored on older systems, you will need to insure your app complies with the iOS Data Storage Guidelines on all versions of iOS that your application supports
This means that even if I use the "skipBackupFlag", I'll still have the problem that the database is getting backed up to the cloud, I think.
So, the third option, which is pretty much of an ugly hack, is to split the database into two. Put the updatable part into the NSLibrary or NSDocuments directory, and leave the rest in application resources. This would have the small, updatable part stored on the cloud, and leave the rest in the app resources directory. The problem is that this splits the db for no good reason, and introduces possible performance issues with having two databases open at once.
So, my question is, is my interpretation of the rules correct? Am I going to have to go with option 3?
p.s. I noticed in my last post cited urls were edited to links without the url showing. How do I do this?
Have you considered using external file references as described in https://developer.apple.com/library/IOS/#releasenotes/DataManagement/RN-CoreData/_index.html . Specifically, refer to "setAllowsExternalBinaryDataStorage:" https://developer.apple.com/library/IOS/documentation/Cocoa/Reference/CoreDataFramework/Classes/NSAttributeDescription_Class/reference.html#//apple_ref/occ/instm/NSAttributeDescription/setAllowsExternalBinaryDataStorage: . Pushing out large data into a separate file can help reduce database size .
My app was recently rejected from the app store for storing data in the Documents directory. I had moved it there because with the latest change, the db must now be writeable - it's no longer read-only.
In researching the solution, I've read that it's actually preferable to use NSLibraryDirectory. Is this so, and more importantly, will that address Apple's concerns? Their complaint is that the app lets the user download to much content (it doesn't let the user download any unless you count the db), and that it's storing "too much data" in the "incorrect location." The data is 8 mb, but could grow to about 10 or 12 mb max.
Actually its because of iCloud.
using iCloud, Application's document directory is synced to cloud and to other devices and hence Apple want developers to store only that data in document directory which they want to sync with iCloud.
I came to know this form one of my friends who work # Apple California and I'm not really sure if this material is on Apple's documentation.
I had this issue with an update to a suite of apps I develop the other week. The funny thing was that only five of the seven apps (exactly the same code base) were rejected.
I believe the issue in my case was duplicating assets from the .app bundle into ~/Documents.
My first attempt to comply with their new storage guidelines was to implement the do not backup switch on the files I was copying into ~/Documents. No deal with that so I had to change my implementation to not copy the data at all. The apps were promptly approved.
Your implementation is probably different but in my experience Apple no longer likes you copying things from the app bundle into ~/Documents, as it could be duplicating data unnecessarily (in their view).
They suggest copying into ~/Caches (or whatever it is), but this can be cleared in low storage situations and may not be right for your case either.
Hope that helps.
A product I wrote a year ago uses CoreData (with a SQLite data store). This database file is stored in ~/Library/Application Support//. This was approved by Apple without issue.
"Application Support" does not exist in ~/Library, so you will need to create it.
Documents is not a great place to store your database file for several reasons. Apple has their reasons, since they rejected your app. Another reason is that the Documents directory is accessible by the user (via iTunes), and unless the user deleting your database file is no big deal to the operation of your app, it is best to put it where they can not do anything with it directly and/or inadvertently.
You can still put those files in the Documents folder, you just have to give them an attribute that lets the file system know not to back them up to the iCloud
This is a great example of how to do so on different iOS versions