I am mainly just looking for clarification or resources. Let me explain my situation.
I have an app that internally relies on an always-up-to-date database of items. I'd like to show off items that were released close to today's date. I originally thought I'd just query my database and fetch the relevant items from there. So I began the long process of updating target values so the widget could see my classes, etc... But that was such a HEADACHE.
I thought surely there must be a more lightweight method the designers had in mind, so I then read about "app groups" and being able to pass information via saved settings/preferences. So basically when the app runs, you store some data as json and then you can fetch that information in your widget.
But then, to my knowledge, the data won't update unless the user runs the app again. I was hoping I could keep this widget up to date even if the user hasn't used the app in a long time.
What exactly is the process I should be using to achieve this? Are "app groups" basically the only way to do this? Will I just have to accept that I will often times have stale data?
The CloudKit WWDC videos recommend implementing sync like this:
Track local changes
Send changes to the server
Resolve conflicts
Fetch server changes with CKFetchRecordChangesOperation
Apply server changes
Save server change token
I'm following this pattern in my app, but I'm running into a problem with deletion and parent-child relationships.
Let's say we have a list of books that are split up into categories. Every book has to belong to exactly one category.
I start with data like this:
SERVER
Thrillers: "Look Out!", "Secret Spy"
Non-Fiction: "Sailing the Seas", "Gardening Adventures"
Computer Programming: <empty>
As you can see, the final category is empty. Let's say I have two devices with exact copies of this data.
Now, on Device 1, the user adds a book CloudKit Sync to "Computer Programming":
DEVICE 1
Thrillers: "Look Out!", "Secret Spy"
Non-Fiction: "Sailing the Seas", "Gardening Adventures"
Computer Programming: "CloudKit Sync"
But on Device 2, the user completely deletes the "Computer Programming" category (it's empty, so this is fine from Device 2's point-of-view):
DEVICE 2
Thrillers: "Look Out!", "Secret Spy"
Non-Fiction: "Sailing the Seas", "Gardening Adventures"
Device 1 syncs first, so it creates a new Book entry with its parent field set to Computer Programming.
But now Device 2 starts its sync process. It applies its changes to the server, so it deletes the CKRecord corresponding to "Computer Programming". This is consistent with Device 2's worldview, where the category is empty and can be deleted.
However, when it deletes this category from the server, this doesn't make sense with respect to the worldview of Device 1 and the server itself. There's now an orphan book called CloudKit Sync that has a dangling pointer to its parent.
If I'm following Apple's recommendations from WWDC, how do I avoid this scenario? Depending on the order of the sync, I can easily arrive at an inconsistent state with an orphaned book and an invalid parent reference.
What I'd like to happen is for the Delete command from Device 2 to return an error telling me I'm going to orphan a book and prevent the action from occurring at all, so I can take some action to fix the situation.
Is that possible? Is there another way to approach this?
Yes, the behavior you want for Device 2 is possible. I see three aspects of cloudkit that will come into play in your scenario. Let's look at those first, then how they might be used in your scenario.
First, assuming that both (or all) devices have subscribed to changes to the appropriate records, each device would be notified that someone else added or removed something. The device receiving the alert would then have the opportunity to decide what to do about it. (remove it from it's local view, replace it on the server, etc)
Second, you can set the behavior for handling conflicts using the savePolicy on the CKModifyRecordOperation. You can specify whether the last change should overwrite older records, throw an error, etc. See https://developer.apple.com/documentation/cloudkit/ckrecordsavepolicy?language=objc for the three options. (I've only used this in the context of two users modifying a common record, but a deletion after another user updated the record should then throw a server record changed error).
Third, assuming you've configured the aforementioned savePolicy, is the server change token itself. I find it easiest to envision the change token as just a last-modified timestamp. "My copy of this record was last modified at 10:42pm" kind of thing. Depending on the overwrite options you've selected in the aforementioned savePolicy, the device will receive an NSError Server Record Changed alerting you that the version on the server is from, say, 10:56pm, and that your local version may no longer be valid.
The userInfo in the resulting NSError includes 3 versions of the record in question: the current version on the server, the version you tried to submit, and the common ancestor version. The guides from Apple say it's up to the developer to decide what how to merge this information. But in theory, you'd be able to diff the changes, decide which you want to keep, and then submit a new operation.
Regarding your specific scenario: Assuming you fully authorize and trust both dev1 and dev2 to delete records, then I would subscribe to creation and deletion events, and set the savePolicy to throw an error when attempting a conflicting change. In this case, Device 1 would add the record and Device 2 would receive the notification of the new record. If Device 2 simply attempts to delete the old record, it should fail with a server record changed error, which you could display to the user as
"Someone else modified this record, do you really want to delete it
(y/n)."
Device 2 would have to refresh the record (and receive the new record change token) before proceeding. After that, if Device 2 still wants to delete the new record, it could, but then Device 1 would be notified of the change via the aforementioned subscription. Device 1 would then download the new record to (or in this case remove the old record from) its local view. The subscription notification could alert user 1:
"Your record Foo was just deleted by Bar"
This will work even if the events happen practically simultaneously, because one of the changes will be applied on the server first and the other device's token will immediately become out-of-date. So, if Device 2 managed to delete the record first, Device 1's attempt to modify the record will fail with server record changed because Device 1's change token is now out of date. Device 1's error handler would have to decide whether to honor the deletion or to proceed with creating a new record based on your business rules. Maybe ask user 1 with something like:
"Computer Programming" has been removed from the server. Do you want to recreate
it?
At this point, user1 can send flame emails demanding other users stop deleting their newly created records, and user2 can demand that people stop recreating the records they just "cleaned up." :)
You could get a lot more complicated, maybe giving device 1 precedence over device 2, such that when device 1 is notified that the record is deleted, then device 1 re-writes the record to the server. If you have multiple users with deletion rights, you could determine an order of precedence and build out the appropriate error/notification handlers. However, this seems excruciating complicated and error prone. Loops that auto respond (create, delete, create, delete, create, delete) could occur. I include it only as a hypothetical example, not a recommendation!
Lastly, as a different example, my app has a different scenario. The records in my case are gaming sessions. All players need read access to the session data, but only the originator is given the option to delete the record altogether. So, you might consider whether you really authorize multiple users to delete shared records or not.
We are attempting to build free/busy calendars on our website for our Adobe Connect seminar rooms using data provided by the Adobe Connect API.
Our first attempt used sco-session-seminar-list. This returned data in the expected format and seemed to work perfectly. However, upon review we found that many existing sessions were not being returned. Some of the rooms do not have the API user setup as a host or presenter, so I suspect that may be causing a problem, though the user can see these sessions in the admin which indicates to me that they should have access.
We then tried report-bulk-objects. This did return all seminars as desired. However, it hits the reporting database which means that seminars created in the last 24 hours may not appear. Worse, it does not appear that there is any way to filter by room (or parent sco-id) using this method.
I cannot find any other relevant methods in the API documentation that would work better than the above two for our needs. However, it seems like a free/busy calendar should be a relatively common use of the API.
We finally found a non-intuitively named function that worked for this sort of information:
url="http://#AdobeConnectUrl#/api/xml
name="action" value="sco-expanded-contents">
name="sco-id" value="#roomID#">
name="filter-gte-date-begin" value="2015-01-01">
name="filter-lte-date-begin" value="2015-01-08">
This function will also work for a more informational calendar as it returns details other than just the start and end times (such as the seminar name). It pulls all sessions that occur under the sco-id requested, including those in subfolders. It also runs in real-time.
Is it possible to reorder EKReminders in EKCalendar of type reminders?
In native Reminders app it is possible, but I can't seem to find this option in the API.
So, EKCalendarItem objects have calendarItemExternalIdentifier which is unique to the event across devices. You can use this to your advantage for this ordering strategy.
Every time you fetch events from the calendar API, keep track of their calendarItemExternalIdentifier in whatever persistence store you choose (Core Data, SQLite, Property Lists, etc...) and also keep track of it's order.
So if you used Core Data you might have an entity with two attributes, calendarItemExternalIdentifier and order. Now whenever you present the events to the user, query the persistent store for order of each event and display accordingly. If new events come in, find the highest order and increment from there. When the user re-orders, set the order key for the appropriate record in your persistent store.
I'm developing an iPhone app that uses a user account and a web API to get results (json) from a website. The results are a list of user's events.
Just looking for some advice or strategies - when to cache and when to make an api call... and if the iPhone SDK has anything built in to handle these scenarios.
When I get the results from the server, they populate an array in a controller. In the UI, you can go from a table listing view, to a view of an individual event result - so two controllers share a reference to the same event object.
What gets tricky is that a user can change the details of an event. In this case I make a copy of the local Event object for the user's changes, in case they make an error. If the api call successfully goes through and updates that event on the server, I take these local changes from the Event copy and set the original Event object to match with setters.
I have the original controller observing if any change is made to the local Event object so that it can reflect it in the UI.
Is this the right way of doing things? I don't want to make too many API calls to reload data from the server, But after a user makes an update should I be pulling down the list again with the API call?
...I want to be careful that my local objects don't become out of sync with the remote.
Any advice is appreciated.
I took a similar approach with an app I built. I simply made a duplicate version of the remote data model with Core Data, and I use etags on the backend to prevent sync issues (in my case, it's okay to create duplicate records).
It sounds like you're taking a good approach to this.
Some time back, I developed an iOS app where in, I had almost same requirement to store data on server as well as locally to avoid several network call and also user can see their information without any delay.
In that app, user can store photos, nodes, checkIns and social media post and with all this data, app can form a beautiful timeline. So what we did was, we had everything locally and whenever user phone come in some WIFI zone, we start uploading that data to server and sync both (local and remote) databases.
Note this method works well when only one user can access this data.