In handsontable documentation, it is suggested that we used the hot.getData() method to get the data of the current instance, and then be able to save that data to the database (where hot is an instance of handsontable). the hot.gatData() method returns an array of arrays, of all the data in the handsontable.
the problem is, each cell has other properties/metadata that I like to save (most importantly, the type property). That metadata is not returned as part of the hot.getData() method. So if I want to retrieve my saved data and use the that table correctly in future, I need a way of saving the cell properties.
How can I do that? I could not find that in documentation.
Thank.s
Related
This question is poorly phased but this can be better explained in code.
We have a Core Data Stack with private and main contexts as defined by Marcus Zarra here: http://martiancraft.com/blog/2015/03/core-data-stack/
We call a separate class to do a fetch request (main context) and return an array of NSManagedObjects:
NSArray *ourManagedObjects = [[Client sharedClient].coreDataManager fetchArrayForClass:[OurObject class] sortKey:#"name" ascending:YES];
We then do some processing and store a reference:
self.ourObjects = processedManagedObjects
Our view contains a UITableView and this data is used to populate it and that works just fine.
We change the data on our CMS, pull to refresh on the UITableView to trigger a sync (private context) and then call this same function to retrieve the updated data. However, the fetch request returns the exact same data as before even though when I check the sqlite db directly it contains the new data. To get the new values to display I have to reload the app.
I have discovered that if I don't assign the processedManagedObjects to self, the fetch request does indeed return the correct data, so it looks like holding a reference to the NSManagedObject stops it from getting new data from the main context. However I have no idea why that would be.
To clarify, we're pretty sure there's nothing wrong with our Core Data Stack, even when these managed objects are not being updated, other are being updated just fine, it's only this one where we store a local reference.
It sounds like what's going on is:
Managed objects don't automatically update themselves to reflect the latest data in the persistent store when changes are made via a different managed object context.
As a result, if you keep a reference to the objects, they keep whatever data they already had.
On the other hand if you don't keep a reference but instead re-fetch them, you get the new data because there was no managed object hanging around with its old data.
You have a few options:
You could keep the reference and have your context refresh the managed objects, using either the refresh(_, mergeChanges:) method or refreshAllObjects().
If it makes sense for your app, use an NSFetchedResultsController and use its delegate methods to be notified of changes.
Don't keep the reference.
The first is probably best-- refreshAllObjects() is probably what you want. Other options might be better based on other details of your app.
Try setting the shouldRefreshRefetchedObjects property of the fetch request to true. According to the documentation:
By default when you fetch objects, they maintain their current property values, even if the values in the persistent store have changed. Invoking this method with the parameter true means that when the fetch is executed, the property values of fetched objects are updated with the current values in the persistent store.
I wish to save a dictionary containing some Core Data objects (bunch of different entities). The objects also have quite a few relationships (and inverse relationships) defined. What would be the best way to go about it?
I tried using NSKeyedArchiver and writing to a file. While that works great, when trying to read from the file using NSKeyedUnarchiver, it fails on one of the classes with the error
-[SomeEntity initWithCoder:]: unrecognized selector sent to instance
EDIT - More details
I have a bunch of objects, each having properties based on which they can be filtered. The properties are in themselves Core Data entity objects since they have a complex structure.
I wish to save the filters the user has selected so that the next time they view the objects, the objects can be filtered as per their previous selection.
Say there are 3 filters, Filter A, B and C and each can have 5 different values. Now the user might select Filter A1, A2, B1 and C3 (or a different combination). My question, how do I save these selected filters (A1, A2, B1 and C3 in this case) using Core Data?
Let me see if I understand your question: You have a collection of managedObjects that are already saved in a context. They may already be persisted in the SQL database. You want to save that collection ALSO to another file for other purposes. You have already considered saving the information of this collection inside core-data in some way and have already rejected it. You have also considered simply saving the query generation tokens to save the state of the database as it currently is, but that also is not what you want. The point is to have a file that contains a copy of some of the managedObjects organized in a way that you can get the data back without using the SQL database that was already designed exactly for that purpose.
Solution 1: Turn each managed object in a dictionary.
You can get every attribute and every property of every object by getting a managed object's entity and then accessing the attributesByName and
relationshipsByName property of the entity. From there you make a simple loop to put each property into a dictionary. I also suggest you store the objectID and point to the objectID when encoding the relationships. Then replace the managedObject in your dictionary with dictionary that contains all the attributes and relationship. This new dictionary should be easy to archive and unarchive.
This make sure that the data when you unarchive is exactly how you left it. When you unarchive you will get a COPY of data and if the managed objects have changed in your database since then, you will get the OLD values. Also these copies are not core-data object because they are unconnected to a managed Object Context.
Solution 2: Just save the Managed Object's ObjectId.
Replace every managed object in your collection with the object's objectId. This dictionary can be easily archived. When you unarchive it replace every objectId with a core data object (if found) using existingObjectWithID: on the context. If entities have been deleted then you won't get them back. If entities have changed then you will get the NEW values.
Solution 3: Don't do any of this
It seems to me that you may not be aware core-data are already saved in a database. If you have some collection of managedObjects, you should be able to recreated it from your database. If you aren't able to, then you should add properties and/or relationships that will allow you to so.
Try like this :
ARCHIVE :
NSDictionary *yourDictData = [NSDictionary dictionaryWithObject:json forKey:#"key"]; // This is for example. Here you have to replace ur dictionary
NSData *myData = [NSKeyedArchiver archivedDataWithRootObject:yourDictData];
UNARCHIVE :
NSDictionary *myData = [NSKeyedUnarchiver unarchiveObjectWithData:yourDictData];
I am in a situation where I allow the user to download a PFObject and modify it locally, and they can then either cancel the changes or hit Done, which will dismiss the editing interface but NOT upload the changes to Parse yet. They need to hit Save on the previous screen to write all changes to the database at once.
The problem is once the PFObject is modified, you cannot revert it to its prior state without refetching from the database. But I cannot always refetch the data from the database every time they hit Cancel because the prior state may not be uploaded to Parse yet (and that's a bad UX making them wait to discard changes that are only stored locally).
For example, imagine the user taps to edit the PFObject, they make changes then hit Done, then tap on it again and further edit the object, then hit Cancel. In this case, the object needs to be reverted to its prior state, but that state has not been uploaded to Parse yet. So I cannot refetch the data from the database to revert changes otherwise it would overwrite the changes they made the first time.
To solve this problem, I would simply fetch the PFObject and store a copy of it. I'd call that the transient object. I would have another property that stores the real object. The user would modify the transient object, and when they hit Cancel I would simply set that to nil, if they instead hit Done I would set the real object equal to the transient object, and once they finally hit Save I would save the real object to the database. That way I can be sure changes aren't being made to the real object until the user commits the changes. The problem is, PFObject does not adopt the NSCopying protocol (not sure why), therefore I cannot create a copy of the PFObject. Any change I make to it affects the real object.
How can this be resolved, without modifying the app's design that allows control over when the data is committed and later saved? Is there a way to extend PFObject and adopt NSCopying, has it been done before?
I did consider storing the attributes of the object in a dictionary and allow the user to edit that instead, then upon commit set each of those attributes on the PFObject. The problem with this solution arises with complex structures. In this app, I allow the user to modify multiple arrays that contain multiple PFObjects. It's just infeasible to try to recreate and later merge changes with complex structures like this beyond a single simple PFObject.
I ran into this same problem. I did not make any changes directly to the PFObject, but rather, saved the updates in an NSDictionary. When the user clicks the done button, I then update the PFObject and saveInBackground. I don't think there is a "discard local changes" option for PFObject. If you don't do this, the only option is to throw out the existing PFObject and fetch again.
Regarding the NSDictionary comment, perhaps NSArray would be better. The implementation really depends on your specific program, but I'll give a quick example. The NSArray we'll call instructionArray. Imagine there are 3 sections in a tableView. Also assume that the data source for each section is an NSArray of PFObjects. Now say you want to set the age property of each PFObject in Section 2 to 35.
Add an NSArray object (corresponding to an instruction to carry out) to the instructionArray. This instruction to carry out could have the form
Section to update
Property to update
Value to update to
So the object you'll add is #[#(2),#"age",#(35)];
Given that the user is probably carrying out a finite amount of instructions, it might not be that performance heavy to loop through the instructionArray in cellForRowAtIndexPath so when a cell uses its corresponding PFObject to figure out what to display, it can loop through the instructions after and change what is displayed as if the PFObject was updated.
When the save button is touched, loop through the instructions and actually edit the PFObjects themselves.
If you need the instructions to handle specific objects rather than sections, then you just have to update the structure of the instructionArray. Maybe you could include an identifier to indicate what type of instruction it is.
In Parse.com, the help document for updating an object seems to require a query first to retrieve the object before one can update the meta data.
Given that I know the objectId of the object I am updating, do I still have to make this additional call to retrieve everything else about the object before I can send an update call (via saveInBackground)?
Yes, you do. In order to update an object from parse, you must have a local copy.
In order to make a call to update an object - which can take several forms of save or saveInBackground or saveEventually, etc. - you must first make a query to have a copy of the object.
If you know the objectId, is sounds like you have already run a query on an associated object - why not get the full object then with an includeKey: call? https://www.parse.com/docs/ios_guide#queries-relational/iOS
I'm using Parse as the backend for my app. My app will be used in the field where service will nonexistent or spotty at best so I need to store information offline. I currently save data for the user in a plist in the background (Title, location coordinates, notes, additional data). Since Parse's current iOS offline saving is fairly poor (From what I've read), I was hoping to get around it by creating an array or dictionary from the plist and upload that to Parse by giving it an array once the user is back in cell range.
As it occurs now, when I upload the array, it simply puts the entire contents of the array in a single cell in the database. Is there a way to parse the array and create a new row for each entry/object in the array?
I may have overlooked a better way to do this. If someone has a suggestion I would appreciate it!
I solved it. I iterated through the array using a for loop and added each index as a separate object.