I am having an app where there is a search feature that does a network request. However uses the same model framework as the entire app.
This means that when the user searches for something I need to create managed objects from the found data, save them and display them. However this messes up old records with the user recent data.
I would ideally like to save the managed objects found in the search in a separate in-memory persistent store so it doesn't make disorder in the main data.
I haven't done something like this before so what is the best way to approach it?
Thank you!
As has been suggested by #stevesliva, you do not need to involve yourself into the complexities of maintaining multiple partially in-memory stores. The way to go here is to create a child context and fetch the online data into this context. Once you do not need the data any more, just discard the context.
If you decide to save the downloaded data, you can simply "push" the changes to the main context via save:. At that point you could make necessary adjustments to the data so they fit into the user data. Depending on your model, one feasible solution could be to create another attribute on one of the entities that marks linked objects as distinct from the user created objects.
Related
I want to ask for a safe way to clear subEntities in coredata.
I have my a many-to-many relationship like this: Product *<->* Product. Therefore, I've got to create a subEntity to hold some special values between (sortPosition, groupName.....).
So it's like this: Product *<->1 ProductSubEntity 1<->*Product.
When I download products from server's API, the easiest way to update correctly correspond to the server's result is:
Remove all child relationship ([self removeProductSubEntities:self.subEntities]).
Add sub from server's result.
Result: There'd be a lot of subEntity in coredata (which won't hold relationship to any product), and this might take storage/memory/cpu when CRUD (I think?). But I can't actual delete the subEntity (in case it's being hold reference to as an viewController's Object somewhere, and it might cause crash: access to a deleted object).
QUESTION:
How can I clear those sub entities (might occur sometimes) if:
No relationship to any product.
No actual reference from anywhere (any viewControllers or objects)???
P/S: I'm thinking of implement a batch delete when terminate app. Could that be consider a safe solution?
I don't consider this to be a datastore issue, rather a UI update issue. You should delete the objects from the datastore when you don't need them any more and you should update the UI accordingly.
1 thing you didn't mention is re-use. It's possible that your download may be an update to an existing item, which you could find and update, then life is easy all round. Arguably everything below still applies in this case though as your UI might not update to reflect changes and you may need to refresh the managed object.
For the UI update it's generally wise to observe the datastore for changes, usually with an NSFetchedResultsController. If you're doing this then your UI would automatically update itself with the changes.
If you're explicitly passing entity instances around then you should have some way to trigger an update explicitly, and exactly how that works depends on your UI. Generally speaking you'd be doing something like posting a UINotification to tell the system that the datastore changed and they need to re-validate their data objects. For the UI you shouldn't be showing now-dead objects to the user, and in your question where you talk about not deleting to avoid crashes, it's probably worse to allow the user to update invalid objects and just quietly not telling them that their updates won't be saved. When the notification is received you may want to pop a (some) controller(s) off the stack, or re-query the datastore for the new data to be displayed.
If for some reason you don't want to do the above, then yes, you can query for all of the entities with a nil relationship and then batch delete them. This should be done on a background thread just like data loading and I'd recommend doing it on app load instead of close (because you won't have so many view controllers loaded and the ones that are should all have only valid references now...).
I am trying to use multiple (two) persistent stores with Core Data for the first time.
It seems quite simple to add a store; but once this is done, how do I specify that a request to write (or read) some information to (or from) an entity has to be performed on one store or the other?
Some sample code would be welcome, but I can’t find anything on the net.
Fetches always cover all of the persistent stores managed by the coordinator.
When adding data, you can do either of the following:
Use configurations in your data model and when adding persistent stores. Configurations define named subsets of your model that contain some but not all entities. If an entity only exists in a configuration that's only used with one persistent store file, then new instances will automatically go to that store.
If the above doesn't work for your app, you'll need to call assignObject:toPersistentStore: to tell the managed object context which store to use.
I have already read Rails - How do I temporarily store a rails model instance? and similar questions but I cannot find a successful answer.
Imagine I have the model Customer, which may contain a huge amount of information attached (simple attributes, data in other tables through has_many relation, etc...). I want the application's user to access all data in a single page with a single Save button on it. As the user makes changes in the data (i.e. he changes simple attributes, adds or deletes has_many items,...) I want the application to update the model, but without committing changes to the database. Only when the user clicks on Save, the model must be committed.
For achieving this I need the model to be kept by Rails between HTTP requests. Furthermore, two different users may be changing the model's data at the same time, so these temporary instances should be bound to the Rails session.
Is there any way to achieve this? Is it actually a good idea? And, if not, how can one design a web application in which changes in a model cannot be retained in the browser but in the server until the user wants to commit them?
EDIT
Based on user smallbutton.com's proposal, I wonder if serializing the model instance to a temporary file (whose path would be stored in the session hash), and then reloading it each time a new request arrives, would do the trick. Would it work in all cases? Is there any piece of information that would be lost during serialization/deserialization?
As HTTP requests are stateless you need some kind of storeage between requests. The session is the easiest way to store data between requests. As for you the session will not be enough because you need it to be accessed by multiple users.
I see two ways to achive your goal:
1) Get some fast external data storage like a key-value server (redis, or anything you prefer http://nosql-database.org/) where you put your objects via serializing/deserializing (eg. JSON).
This may be fast depending on your design choices and data model but this is the harder approach.
2) Just store your Objects in the DB as you would regularly do and get them versioned: (https://github.com/airblade/paper_trail). Then you can just store a timestamp when people hit the save-button and you can always go back to this state. This would be the easier approach i guess but may be a bit slower depending on the size of your data model changes ( but I think it'll do )
EDIT: If you need real-time collaboration between users you should probably have a look at something like Firebase
EDIT2: Anwer to your second question, whether you can put the data into a file:
Sure you can do that. But you would need some kind of locking to prevent data loss if more than one person is editing. You will need that aswell if you go for 1) but tools like redis already include locks to achive your goal (eg. redis-semaphore). Depending on your data you may need to build some logic for merging different changes of different users.
3) Another aproach that came to my mind would be doing all editing with Javascript and save it in one db-transaction. This would go well with synchronization tools like firebase (or your own synchronization via Rails streaming API)
I have some data that needs to be loaded from the server (backend). For example, let's just say I have an entities of user and event. The relationship between them is many-to-many (user can attend many events and event can have many attendees). All the data is stored remotely on backend and locally in Core Data. When I download data from backend I convert it into NSManagedObjects and store it in NSManagedObjectContext. Everything's very simple, but...
When I download a list of events I want to know, how many attendees this event has. But I cannot download a list of users in the same request, because it's totally overkill. What I need is to download, let's say, a list of users' unique ids so that I can have two things: total number of attendees and means to download detailed data of concrete users (via unique id). Or there's another example: I need to know total number of attendees and download a limited set of them, so I can create some entities in CoreData, but not all of them.
So the main question is how am I supposed to store such information in my CoreData? Meaning I need to know that for some entity there are some related entities in relationship that are not actually currently present in CoreData, but I know how many of them there should be. The first thing that came in my mind is to have a attribute called something like usersCount in my event entity, but that seems to be kind of dirty. What is the best practice for such situation?
Please comment if the question is not clear enough so I can maybe add some more specifics.
When you download an event with a list of corresponding user ids, then you can create
the Event object and also the related User objects, but you fill only the "userId"
attribute in the user object.
Later, when you download the complete user info, you update the existing (incomplete) objects
or create new user objects. Implementing Find-or-Create Efficiently in the "Core Data Programming Guide"
describes a pattern that might be useful.
So the idea is to create Core Data objects with incomplete information first and update the
objects with detailed information later. The advantage is that you can set up all relationships immediatly, and e.g. counting related users works even if the user information
is yet incomplete.
There is nothing dirty about having an attribute to store the count, especially if those entities are retrieved and paged via separate requests.
First, Thank you for any help provided.
I have an iOS leveraging CoreData to retain various presentations, this data comes from a sqlite file and there is no server connection.
I will have to be able to provide App updates (via appstore), this update may add more data to the database.
The tricky part is that it can not simply overwrite the current database, there are a few user tables that I will not like touched.
Please provide any information I should consider when accomplishing this or any links are greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
Given your app has no server connection, you will have to rely on shipping data within the updated application itself. I would recommend using a plist file or define your own xml or json structure. You can then read this data to create/update core data nsmanagedobjects.
It looks like someone in the past was using plist->coredata on SO
Would you have relationships between user created data and shipped data?
If not, you might go the route of connecting two stored to the persistent store coordinator. The shipped store would be read-only. The store with user created data would be read-write. You can use this approach, too, if you have relationships between shipped and user-created objects, but it's a lot more complicated, since CoreData doesn't manage cross-store relationships for you, and you'll need to write your own logic (doable, but not straight forward).
If you need to have relationships between shipped and user-created objects, you can still ship a CoreData store. When the app launches for the first time (no user-created objects), you copy the store to the Documents folder and user this store to create your CoreData stack. User created objects will be added to this store. Once you have new 'shipped' objects (i.e. a new store in the app-bundle), you'll have to manually migrate that stores data into the store that the user has changed. You'll have to be able to find
(1) objects that need to be deleted
(2) objects that need to be updated (changed)
(3) objects that need to be added
If you mark your shipped objects with a special flag such that you can tell if it's a user created object or a shipped one, that would be doable. You also have to have some sort of ID to be able to tell which objects in the new store correspond to which ones in the existing (old) store.
You do not need to go the route of using plists. In fact, I'd recommend against it. You can easily open two stores at the same time. Either to use both stored, or just to migrate objects from one store to the other store.