I have a function with a completion handler that works to download videos from youtube's API.
On the first run, it works great. On subsequent runs, since the videos are stored in the device, and shown before the array of videos is updated, I would like for the user to be able to interact with the table, while it is updated (if required). However, while the information is being downloaded, the interaction with the table or the app is blocked.
I guess this has something to do with Grand Central Dispatch, but I don't know how to use it.
Networking().getPlaylists() { (result: String) -> () in
self.activityView.removeFromSuperview()
print("should reload data")
self.tableView.reloadData()
}
}
Could somebody give me some pointers?
Ideally your network code would execute on a background thread:
func getPlaylists() {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), {
//Do network stuff
})
}
but also before you call your completion, make sure you flip back to the main thread before you do UI logic like updating your tableview:
func getPlaylists() {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), {
//Do network stuff
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue()) {
completion(results)
}
})
}
It was actually not Alamofire that was blocking my UI (it is actually an async function), but it was SwiftyJSON while I was parsing. I solved it by dispatching_async but over the parsing section and not the rest of the function!
See more here: Alamofire http json request block ui
Thanks!
Related
I have a question concerning asynchronous requests. I want to request data from different sources on the web. Each source might have the data I want but I do not know that beforehand. Because I only want that information once, I don't care about the other sources as soon as one source has given me the data I need. How would I go about doing that?
I thought about doing it with a didSet and only setting it once, something like this:
var dogPicture : DogPicture? = nil {
didSet {
// Do something with the picture
}
}
func findPictureOfDog(_ sources) -> DogPicture? {
for source in sources {
let task = URL.Session.shared.dataTask(with: source) { (data, response, error) in
// error handling ...
if data.isWhatIWanted() && dogPicture == nil {
dogPicture = data.getPicture()
}
}
task.resume()
}
}
sources = ["yahoo.com", "google.com", "pinterest.com"]
findPictureOfDog(sources)
However it would be very helpful, if I could just wait until findPictureOfDog() is finished, because depending on if I find something or not, I have to ask the user for more input.
I don't know how I could do it in the above way, because if I don't find anything the didSet will never be called, but I should ask the user for a picture then.
A plus: isWhatIWanted() is rather expensive, so If there was a way to abort the execution of the handler once I found a DogPicture would be great.
I hope I made myself clear and hope someone can help me out with this!
Best regards and thank you for your time
A couple of things:
First, we’re dealing with asynchronous processes, so you shouldn’t return the DogPicture, but rather use completion handler pattern. E.g. rather than:
func findPictureOfDog(_ sources: [String]) -> DogPicture? {
...
return dogPicture
}
You instead would probably do something like:
func findPictureOfDog(_ sources: [String], completion: #escaping (Result<DogPicture, Error>) -> Void) {
...
completion(.success(dogPicture))
}
And you’d call it like:
findPictureOfDog(sources: [String]) { result in
switch result {
case .success(let dogPicture): ...
case .failure(let error): ...
}
}
// but don’t try to access the DogPicture or Error here
While the above was addressing the “you can’t just return value from asynchronous process”, the related observations is that you don’t want to rely on a property as the trigger to signal when the process is done. All of the “when first process finishes” logic should be in the findPictureOfDog routine, and call the completion handler when it’s done.
I would advise against using properties and their observers for this process, because it begs questions about how one synchronizes access to ensure thread-safety, etc. Completion handlers are unambiguous and avoid these secondary issues.
You mention that isWhatIWanted is computationally expensive. That has two implications:
If it is computationally expensive, then you likely don’t want to call that synchronously inside the dataTask(with:completionHandler:) completion handler, because that is a serial queue. Whenever dealing with serial queues (whether main queue, network session serial queue, or any custom serial queue), you often want to get in and out as quickly as possible (so the queue is free to continue processing other tasks).
E.g. Let’s imagine that the Google request came in first, but, unbeknownst to you at this point, it doesn’t contain what you wanted, and the isWhatIWanted is now slowly checking the result. And let’s imagine that in this intervening time, the Yahoo request that came in. If you call isWhatIWanted synchronously, the result of the Yahoo request won’t be able to start checking its result until the Google request has failed because you’re doing synchronous calls on this serial queue.
I would suggest that you probably want to start checking results as they came in, not waiting for the others. To do this, you want a rendition of isWhatIWanted the runs asynchronously with respect to the network serial queue.
Is the isWhatIWanted a cancelable process? Ideally it would be, so if the Yahoo image succeeded, it could cancel the now-unnecessary Pinterest isWhatIWanted. Canceling the network requests is easy enough, but more than likely, what we really want to cancel is this expensive isWhatIWanted process. But we can’t comment on that without seeing what you’re doing there.
But, let’s imagine that you’re performing the object classification via VNCoreMLRequest objects. You might therefore cancel any pending requests as soon as you find your first match.
In your example, you list three sources. How many sources might there be? When dealing with problems like this, you often want to constrain the degree of concurrency. E.g. let’s say that in the production environment, you’d be querying a hundred different sources, you’d probably want to ensure that no more than, say, a half dozen running at any given time, because of the memory and CPU constraints.
All of this having been said, all of these considerations (asynchronous, cancelable, constrained concurrency) seem to be begging for an Operation based solution.
So, in answer to your main question, the idea would be to write a routine that iterates through the sources, and calling the main completion handler upon the first success and make sure you prevent any subsequent/concurrent requests from calling the completion handler, too:
You could save a local reference to the completion handler.
As soon as you successfully find a suitable image, you can:
call that saved completion handler;
nil your saved reference (so in case you have other requests that have completed at roughly the same time, that they can’t call the completion handler again, eliminating any race conditions); and
cancel any pending operations so that any requests that have not finished will stop (or have not even started yet, prevent them from starting at all).
Note, you’ll want to synchronize the the above logic, so you don’t have any races in this process of calling and resetting the completion handler.
Make sure to have a completion handler that you call after all the requests are done processing, in case you didn’t end up finding any dogs at all.
Thus, that might look like:
func findPictureOfDog(_ sources: [String], completion: #escaping DogPictureCompletion) {
var firstCompletion: DogPictureCompletion? = completion
let synchronizationQueue: DispatchQueue = .main // note, we could have used any *serial* queue for this, but main queue is convenient
let completionOperation = BlockOperation {
synchronizationQueue.async {
// if firstCompletion not nil by the time we get here, that means none of them matched
firstCompletion?(.failure(DogPictureError.noneFound))
}
print("done")
}
for source in sources {
let url = URL(string: source)!
let operation = DogPictureOperation(url: url) { result in
if case .success(_) = result {
synchronizationQueue.async {
firstCompletion?(result)
firstCompletion = nil
Queues.shared.cancelAllOperations()
}
}
}
completionOperation.addDependency(operation)
Queues.shared.processingQueue.addOperation(operation)
}
OperationQueue.main.addOperation(completionOperation)
}
So what might that DogPictureOperation might look like? I might create an asynchronous custom Operation subclass (I just subclass a general purpose AsynchronousOperation subclass, like the one here) that will initiate network request and then run an inference on the resulting image upon completion. And if canceled, it would cancel the network request and/or any pending inferences (pursuant to point 3, above).
If you care about only one task use a completion handler, call completion(nil) if no picture was found.
var dogPicture : DogPicture?
func findPictureOfDog(_ sources, completion: #escaping (DogPicture?) -> Void) {
for source in sources {
let task = URL.Session.shared.dataTask(with: source) { (data, response, error) in
// error handling ...
if data.isWhatIWanted() && dogPicture == nil {
let picture = data.getPicture()
completion(picture)
}
}
task.resume()
}
}
sources = ["yahoo.com", "google.com", "pinterest.com"]
findPictureOfDog(sources) { [weak self] picture in
if let picture = picture {
self?.dogPicture = picture
print("picture set")
} else {
print("No picture found")
}
}
You can use DispatchGroup to run a check when all of your requests have returned:
func findPictureOfDog(_ sources: [String]) -> DogPicture? {
let group = DispatchGroup()
for source in sources {
group.enter()
let task = URLSession.shared.dataTask(with: source) { (data, response, error) in
// error handling ...
if data.isWhatIWanted() && dogPicture == nil {
dogPicture = data.getPicture()
}
group.leave()
}
task.resume()
}
group.notify(DispatchQueue.main) {
if dogPicture == nil {
// all requests came back but none had a result.
}
}
}
I am creating an NSAsynchronousFetchRequest which has a completion block inside it.
I have seen various examples where some include using dispatch queue on the main thread and others don't. For example the Ray Wenderlich core data book doesn't call the result on the main thread.
Should I go back on the main thread when executing the result. Initially I thought I had to but now I don't. Some definitive clarity would be great.
fun exampleFetch(_ completionHandler: #escaping () -> () {
let fetchRequest = NSFetchRequest<NSDictionary>(entityName: "Example")
let asyncFetchRequest = NSAsynchronousFetchRequest<NSDictionary>(fetchRequest: fetchRequest) { result in
// DispatchQueue.main.async { // is this needed
completion()
//}
}
managedContext.performChanges {
do {
try self.managedContext.execute(asyncFetchRequest)
} catch let error {
print("error trying to fetch saving objects:", error.localizedDescription)
}
}
}
You should not explicitly call the completion handler on the main queue. Let the caller decide how to handle it. If anything, document that the completion handler will be called on an arbitrary queue. Then the client calling your exampleFetch method knows that it is their responsibility to be sure that process the result on whatever queue it needs.
This gives the client more control.
This also prevents a lot of needless thread switching. A client may call exampleFetch from a background queue and it may want to process the results in the background. If you explicitly put the completion on the main queue, the client then needs to explicitly switch back to a background queue to process the result. That's two needless queue switches and it's wasted effort on the main queue.
I need to sync web database in my coredata, for which I perform service api calls. I am using Alamofire with Swift 3. There are 23 api calls, giving nearly 24k rows in different coredata entities.
My problem: These api calls blocks UI for a minute, which is a long time for a user to wait.
I tried using DispatchQueue and performing the task in background thread, though nothing worked. This is how I tried :
let dataQueue = DispatchQueue.init(label: "com.app.dataSyncQueue")
dataQueue.async {
DataSyncController().performStateSyncAPICall()
DataSyncController().performRegionSyncAPICall()
DataSyncController().performStateRegionSyncAPICall()
DataSyncController().performBuildingRegionSyncAPICall()
PriceSyncController().performBasicPriceSyncAPICall()
PriceSyncController().performHeightCostSyncAPICall()
// Apis which will be used in later screens are called in background
self.performSelector(inBackground: #selector(self.performBackgroundTask), with: nil)
}
An API call from DataSyncController:
func performStateSyncAPICall() -> Void {
DataSyncRequestManager.fetchStatesDataWithCompletionBlock {
success, response, error in
self.apiManager.didStatesApiComplete = true
}
}
DataSyncRequestManager Code:
static func fetchStatesDataWithCompletionBlock(block:#escaping requestCompletionBlock) {
if appDelegate.isNetworkAvailable {
Util.setAPIStatus(key: kStateApiStatus, with: kInProgress)
DataSyncingInterface().performStateSyncingWith(request:DataSyncRequest().createStateSyncingRequest() , withCompletionBlock: block)
} else {
//TODO: show network failure error
}
}
DataSyncingInterface Code:
func performStateSyncingWith(request:Request, withCompletionBlock block:#escaping requestCompletionBlock)
{
self.interfaceBlock = block
let apiurl = NetworkHttpClient.getBaseUrl() + request.urlPath!
Alamofire.request(apiurl, parameters: request.getParams(), encoding: URLEncoding.default).responseJSON { response in
guard response.result.isSuccess else {
block(false, "error", nil )
return
}
guard let responseValue = response.result.value else {
block (false, "error", nil)
return
}
block(true, responseValue, nil)
}
}
I know many similar questions have been already posted on Stackoverflow and mostly it is suggested to use GCD or Operation Queue, though trying DispatchQueues didn't work for me.
Am I doing something wrong?
How can I not block UI and perform the api calls simultaneously?
You can do this to run on a background thread:
DispatchQueue.global(qos: .background).async {
// Do any processing you want.
DispatchQueue.main.async {
// Go back to the main thread to update the UI.
}
}
DispatchQueue manages the execution of work items. Each work item submitted to a queue is processed on a pool of threads managed by the system.
I usually use NSOperationQueue with Alamofire, but the concepts are similar. When you set up an async queue, you allow work to be performed independently of the main (UI) thread, so that your app doesn't freeze (refuse user input). The work will still take however long it takes, but your program doesn't block while waiting to finish.
You really have only put one item into the queue.
You are adding to the queue only once, so all those "perform" calls wait for the previous one to finish. If it is safe to run them concurrently, you need to add each of them to the queue separately. There's more than one way to do this, but the bottom line is each time you call .async {} you are adding one item to the queue.
dataQueue.async {
DataSyncController().performStateSyncAPICall()
}
dataQueue.async {
DataSyncController(). performRegionSyncAPICall l()
}
I am writing an app that always use dispatchQueue to help me handle packet received from another devices.
Hence, in my code, depends on the packet received, it will trigger codes like:
if (// condition fulfilled) {
let queue = DispatchQueue.global(qos: DispatchQoS.QoSClass.default)
queue.async { () -> Void in
self.handlePacket(packet: packet) {
DispatchQueue.main.async {
// do something.
}
}
}
}
Then I found that when one part of the code with the same variable "queue" is executed, another part code can be triggered without calling. And the app crash at the line queue.async { () -> Void in
Is that I cannot use the same name for the queue? Or my code actually mess up those queues?
Please advise.
First of all, you should ask yourself, what exactly are you trying to achieve? Is handlePacket(_) too heavy to process it on current queue?
Concurrency is hard, and you should try to avoid it, until you realize how does concurrency and queues work in iOS.
I'm a beginner in swift 2, and I'm trying to make my program blocks while showing only a progress spinner until some operation finishes, I made that code snippet in a button with the action "touch up inside", my problem is that while debugging,Xcode 7 CPU usage jumps to 190 % once I tap my button and keeps high until the flag changes its value, Is it normal that CPU usage jumps like that?, also Is it a good practice to use the following snippet or shud i use sleep or some other mechanism inside my infinite loop?
let queue2 = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0)
dispatch_async(self.queue2) { () -> Void in
while(flag == true)
{
//wait until flag sets to false from previous func
}
self.dispatch_main({
//continue after the flag became false
})
This is a very economical completion handler
func test(completion:() -> ())
{
// do hard work
completion()
}
let queue2 = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0)
dispatch_async(queue2) {
test() {
print("completed")
}
}
or with additional dispatch to the main queue to update the UI
let queue2 = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0)
dispatch_async(queue2) {
test() {
print("completed")
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue()) {
// update UI
}
}
}
This is totally wrong approach as you are using while loop for waiting. You should use Completion Handler to achieve this kind of stuff.
Completion handlers are callbacks that allow a client to perform some action when a framework method or function completes its task. Often the client uses a completion handler to free state or update the user interface. Several framework methods let you implement completion handlers as blocks (instead of, say, delegation methods or notification handlers).
Refer Apple documentation for more details.
I suppose you have a sort of class which manages these "some operation finishes".
When you finish your operations you can comunicate by completion handler or delegation. In the meanwhile you can disable the user interaction of your UI until the end of these operations.
If you provide more informations about your background operations I can add some snippets of code.