AFNetworking: parsing xml in background - ios

I think I am on the right track, but just wanted to double check here. I recently started using AFNetworking to obtain a large XML file from a database, which I then need to parse (I got that part all figured out). I would like the parsing to happen on a background thread, and then update my UI on the main thread. So I added another dispatch_async block inside the success block of the AFXMLRequestOperation:
self.xmlOperation =
[AFXMLRequestOperation XMLParserRequestOperationWithRequest: request
success: ^(NSURLRequest *request, NSHTTPURLResponse *response, NSXMLParser *XMLParser) {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
XMLParser.delegate = self;
[XMLParser setShouldProcessNamespaces:YES];
[XMLParser parse];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[self.searchResultViewController didFinishImport];
[[NSManagedObjectContext MR_defaultContext] MR_saveToPersistentStoreAndWait];
});
});
}
failure: ^(NSURLRequest *request, NSHTTPURLResponse *response, NSError *error, NSXMLParser *XMLParser) {
// show error
}];
[self.xmlOperation start];
Is the the proper/correct/preferred way to do this?

This looks pretty good. Two observations, though:
Does any of your code on the main thread can access any of the objects actively being updated by your NSXMLParserDelegate methods? If not, you're fine.
But, if you have any code (driving the UI, for example) that is accessing the same objects/collections that the NSXMLParserDelegate methods are updating, then you have to be careful about synchronizing those shared resources. (For more information about synchronizing resources, see the Synchronization section of the Threading Programming Guide and/or the Eliminating Lock Based Code section of the Concurrency Programming Guide.)
Personally, I like to move the NSXMLParserDelegate code into a separate class, and instantiate that for the individual request, that way I know that my request and subsequent parsing process can never be a source of synchronization issues. You still need to synchronize the update model/store process, but you are effectively doing that by performing that final update on the main queue.
Does your UI allow you to issue another XML request while the first one is in progress? If not, you're fine.
If the user can initiate second request while the first is in progress, it opens you up to the (admittedly unlikely) scenario that you could two concurrent processing requests using the same instance of the delegate object. Clearly, you could solve this by preventing subsequent requests until the first one finished (e.g. disable UI elements that request refresh), or use a serial queue, or move the parser into a separate class that you'll instantiate for every request. Personally, I'd be inclined to make make this parse request cancelable and make the issuance of a new request cancel any prior, on-going ones.
Those are two concurrency-related issues as I look at your code sample. Perhaps neither of these are, in fact, an issue with your particular implementation. Having said that, the very fact that the code is so contingent on the rest of your implementation is, itself, an issue.

Related

Send next request when last one is done

I have 100+ request.I need send a new request when the last one is done,so the server will not return error code - 429.
How to make this by afnetworking 3.0?
I'm not very familiar with the specific APIs of AFNetworking, but you could setup:
A variable array containing all your pending requests,
A method called (e.g.) sendNext() that removes the first entry of the array, performs the request asynchronously, and inside the completion block, calls itself.
Of course, you will need a terminating condition, and that is simply stop when the array becomes empty.
There are 2 approaches that can deal with your problem.
Firstly, create an operation queue and add all requests to the queue. After that, create an operation of your new request, then add the dependency to all requests in the queue. As a result, your new operation (will execute the new request) will be performed after the last request is done.
Secondly, you can use dispatch_barrier_async, which will create a synchronized point on your concurrent queue. That means you should create a concurrency queue to execute your 100+ request, and that dispatch_barrier_async blocks in your custom queue will execute the new request.
Thanks Sendoa for the link to the GitHub issue where Mattt explains why this functionality is not working anymore. There is a clear reason why this isn't possible with the new NSURLSession structure; Tasks just aren't operations, so the old way of using dependencies or batches of operations won't work.
I've created this solution using a dispatch_group that makes it possible to batch requests using NSURLSession, here is the (pseudo-)code:
// Create a dispatch group
dispatch_group_t group = dispatch_group_create();
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
// Enter the group for each request we create
dispatch_group_enter(group);
// Fire the request
[self GET:#"endpoint.json"
parameters:nil
success:^(NSURLSessionDataTask *task, id responseObject) {
// Leave the group as soon as the request succeeded
dispatch_group_leave(group);
}
failure:^(NSURLSessionDataTask *task, NSError *error) {
// Leave the group as soon as the request failed
dispatch_group_leave(group);
}];
}
// Here we wait for all the requests to finish
dispatch_group_notify(group, dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
// Do whatever you need to do when all requests are finished
});
I want to look write something that makes this easier to do and discuss with Matt if this is something (when implemented nicely) that could be merged into AFNetworking. In my opinion it would be great to do something like this with the library itself. But I have to check when I have some spare time for that.
This question possible duplicate of AFNetworking 3.0 AFHTTPSessionManager using NSOperation . You can follow #Darji comment for few call, For 100+ call add these utility classes https://github.com/robertmryan/AFHTTPSessionOperation/ .
It is very impractical approach to sent 100+ request operation concurrently. If possible try to reduce it.

Objective C: async block structure VS async network request + completion block

I have been using the following structure in my projects for consuming API data:
dispatch_queue_t queue = dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0);
dispatch_async(queue, ^{
// SYNCHRONOUS network request
// Data processing
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
// UI update
});
});
On the other hand, I have seen quite frequently another structure where the network request is asynchronous (i.e. using AFNetworking) and then the data processing and UI update are handled in the completion block (which is not async - I think).
Here is an example of what I am saying:
NSURLRequest *request = [NSURLRequest requestWithURL:url];
AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation = [[AFHTTPRequestOperation alloc] initWithRequest:request];
operation.responseSerializer = [AFJSONResponseSerializer serializer];
[operation setCompletionBlockWithSuccess:^(AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation, id responseObject) {
// Data processing
// UI update
} failure:^(AFHTTPRequestOperation *operation, NSError *error) {
// Error handling
}];
[operation start];
So, my questions are:
In the second structure there the data processing is not being run asynchronously, it is?
Why are we generally encouraged to run async network requests instead of sync ones from async blocks/threads.
Why the second structure is much more known and spread than the first?
Is there something that I am missing?
In my opinion async calls are much more elegant solutions for networking in any language.
Yes data processing is done in main thread in that example. Parsing strings and creating objects in UI isn't really a cpu cycle consuming job. However lets say you download an image and you want to process it, you shouldn't do it in this block (maybe spawn another thread). But image processing is another scope.it isn't related to the network code so network code is working as intended.
With async network calls, you can cancel/pause the request. But in sync network calls you cannot do that.
First of all gcd is new to the objective-c (i am not really sure but it was available after iOS 4. correct me if i am wrong). Before that we were using delegation and it was a lot of boilerplate codes. But with the second approach you can easily manage the networking code.
I hope this helps.
In the second structure there the data processing is not being run
asynchronously, it is?
No its not. Its run on the main thread. But the time consuming task of fetching data from remote server is already done on another thread. Once the data is retrieved, data processing will not take much time generally and can be run on the main thread. In rare cases(i have not come across any such) if data processing itself takes time and appears to block UI, then we can use NSOperations or GCD queues to process them.
This is achieved by making use of blocks which is just like a callback function.
Why the second structure is much more known and spread than the first?
Its easier to implement and also to understand once you know the syntax for blocks ;)

Using NSUrlConnection inside either NSThread or NSOperation

I am developing a static library that needs to do some stuff in the background, without interacting with the main thread. To give you an idea, think of just logging some user events. The library must keep doing this stuff until the user exits the app or sends it to the background (pushes the home button) - in other words it needs to keep doing stuff inside a loop.
The only interaction between the main app thread and the spawned thread is that occasionally the main app thread will put some stuff (an event object) into a queue that the spawned thread can read/consume. Other than that, the spawned thread just keeps going until the app exists or backgrounds.
Part of what the spawned thread needs to do (though not all of it) involves sending data to an HTTP server. I would have thought that it would be easy to subclass NSThread, override its main method, and just make a synchronous call to NSUrlConnection with some sort of timeout on that connection so the thread doesn't hang forever. For example, in Java/Android, we just subclass Thread, override the start() method and call a synchronous HTTP GET method (say from Apache's HttpClient class). This is very easy and works fine. But from what I have seen here and elsewhere, apparently on iOS it is much more complicated than this and I'm more than a bit confused as to what the best approach is that actually works.
So should I subclass NSThread and somehow use NSUrlConnection? It seems the asynchronous NSUrlConnection does not work inside NSThread because delegate methods don't get called but what about the synchronous method? Do I somehow need to use and configure the RunLoop and set up an autorelease pool? Or should I use an NSOperation? It seems to me that what I am trying to do is pretty common - does anyone have a working example of how to do this properly?
As I understand it, to use NSURLConnection asynchronously you need a runloop. Even if you use an NSOperation you still need a runloop.
All the examples I have seen use the Main Thread to start NSURLConnection which has a runloop. The examples using NSOperation are set up so the operation is Concurrent which tells NSOperationQueue not to provide it's own thread, they then make sure that NSURLConnection is started on the main thread, for example via a call to performSelectorOnMainThread:
Here is an example:
Pulse Engineering Blog: Concurrent Downloads using NSOperationQueues
You can also search the Apple documentation for QRunLoopOperation in the LinkedImageFetcher sample which is an example class showing some ins and outs of this kind of thing.
(Although I'm not sure I actually saw any code that example showing how to run your own runloop, again this example relies on the main thread.)
I've used the grand central dispatch (GCD) methods to achieve this. Here is an example that worked for me in a simple test app (I'm not sure if it applies in a static library, but may be worth a look). I'm using ARC.
In the example, I am kicking off some background work from my viewDidLoad method, but you can kick it off from anywhere. The key is that "dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue…" runs the block in a background thread. See this answer for a good explanation of that method: https://stackoverflow.com/a/12693409/215821
Here is my viewDidLoad:
- (void)viewDidLoad
{
[super viewDidLoad];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, (unsigned long)NULL),
^(void) {
[self doStuffInBackground];
});
}
The doStuffInBackground method is running in the background at this point, so you can just use NSURLConnection synchronously. In my example here, the method loops making network calls until presumably some other code sets backgroundStuffShouldRun = false. A network call is made with a 10 second timeout. After the call, I'm updating a UI label just to show progress. Note that the UI update is performed with "dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue()…". This runs the UI update on the UI thread, as required.
One potential issue with this background work: there isn't a way to cancel the http request itself. But, with a 10 second timeout, you'd be waiting a max of 10 seconds for the thread to abort itself after an outsider (likely some event in your UI) sets backgroundStuffShouldRun = false.
- (void)doStuffInBackground
{
while (backgroundStuffShouldRun) {
// prepare for network call...
NSURL* url = [[NSURL alloc] initWithString:#"http://maps.google.com/maps/geo"];
// set a 10 second timeout on the request
NSURLRequest* request = [[NSURLRequest alloc] initWithURL:url cachePolicy:NSURLCacheStorageAllowed timeoutInterval:10];
NSError* error = nil;
NSURLResponse *response = nil;
// make the request
NSData* data = [NSURLConnection sendSynchronousRequest:request returningResponse:&response error:&error];
// were we asked to stop the background processing?
if (!backgroundStuffShouldRun) {
return;
}
// process response...
NSString* status = #"Success";
if (error) {
if (error.code == NSURLErrorTimedOut) {
// handle timeout...
status = #"Timed out";
}
else {
// handle other errors...
status = #"Other error";
}
}
else {
// success, handle the response body
NSString *dataAsString = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:data encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding];
NSLog(#"%#", dataAsString);
}
// update the UI with our status
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[statusLabel setText:[NSString stringWithFormat:#"completed network call %d, status = %#", callCount, status]];
});
callCount++;
sleep(1); // 1 second breather. not necessary, but good idea for testing
}
}

Stopping an NSOperationQueue

I have an NSOperationQueue that handles importing data from a web server on a loop. It accomplishes this with the following design.
NSURLConnect is wrapped in an NSOperation and added to the Queue
On successful completion of the download (using a block), the data from the request is wrapped in another NSOperation that adds the relevant data to Core Data. This operation is added to the queue.
On successful completion (using another block), (and after a specified delay) I call the method that started it all and return to step 1. Thus, i make another server call x seconds later.
This works great. I'm able to get data from the server and handle everything on the background. And because these are just NSOperations I'm able to put everything in the background, and perform multiple requests at a time. This works really well.
The ONLY problem that I currently have is that I'm unable to successfully cancel the operations once they are going.
I've tried something like the following :
- (void)flushQueue
{
self.isFlushingQueue = YES;
[self.operationQueue cancelAllOperations];
[self.operationQueue waitUntilAllOperationsAreFinished];
self.isFlushingQueue = NO;
NSLog(#"successfully flushed Queue");
}
where self.isFlushingQueue is a BOOL that I use to check before adding any new operations to the queue. This seems like it should work, but in fact it does not. Any ideas on stopping my Frankenstein creation?
Edit (Solved problem, but from a different perspective)
I'm still baffled about why exactly I was unable to cancel these operations (i'd be happy to keep trying possible solutions), but I had a moment of insight on how to solve this problem in a slightly different way. Instead of dealing at all with canceling operations, and waiting til queue is finished, I decided to just have a data structure (NSMutableDictionary) that had a list of all active connections. Something like this :
self.activeConnections = [NSMutableDictionary dictionaryWithDictionary:#{
#"UpdateContacts": #YES,
#"UpdateGroups" : #YES}];
And then before I add any operation to the queue, I simply ask if that particular call is On or Off. I've tested this, and I successfully have finite control over each individual server request that I want to be looping. To turn everything off I can just set all connections to #NO.
There are a couple downsides to this solution (Have to manually manage an additional data structure, and every operation has to start again to see if it's on or off before it terminates).
Edit -- In pursuit of a more accurate solution
I stripped out all code that isn't relevant (notice there is no error handling). I posted two methods. The first is an example of how the request NSOperation is created, and the second is the convenience method for generating the completion block.
Note the completion block generator is called by dozens of different requests similar to the first method.
- (void)updateContactsWithOptions:(NSDictionary*)options
{
//Hard coded for ease of understanding
NSString *contactsURL = #"api/url";
NSDictionary *params = #{#"sortBy" : #"LastName"};
NSMutableURLRequest *request = [self createRequestUsingURLString:contactsURL andParameters:params];
ConnectionCompleteBlock processBlock = [self blockForImportingDataToEntity:#"Contact"
usingSelector:#selector(updateContactsWithOptions:)
withOptions:options andParsingSelector:#selector(requestUsesRowsFromData:)];
BBYConnectionOperation *op = [[BBYConnectionOperation alloc] initWithURLRequest:request
andDelegate:self
andCompletionBlock:processBlock];
//This used to check using self.isFlushingQueue
if ([[self.activeConnections objectForKey:#"UpdateContacts"] isEqualToNumber:#YES]){
[self.operationQueue addOperation:op];
}
}
- (ConnectionCompleteBlock) blockForImportingDataToEntity:(NSString*)entityName usingSelector:(SEL)loopSelector withOptions:(NSDictionary*)options andParsingSelector:(SEL)parseSelector
{
return ^(BOOL success, NSData *connectionData, NSError *error){
//Pull out variables from options
BOOL doesLoop = [[options valueForKey:#"doesLoop"] boolValue];
NSTimeInterval timeInterval = [[options valueForKey:#"interval"] integerValue];
//Data processed before importing to core data
NSData *dataToImport = [self performSelector:parseSelector withObject:connectionData];
BBYImportToCoreDataOperation *importOperation = [[BBYImportToCoreDataOperation alloc] initWithData:dataToImport
andContext:self.managedObjectContext
andNameOfEntityToImport:entityName];
[importOperation setCompletionBlock:^ (BOOL success, NSError *error){
if(success){
NSLog(#"Import %#s was successful",entityName);
if(doesLoop == YES){
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[self performSelector:loopSelector withObject:options afterDelay:timeInterval];
});
}
}
}];
[self.operationQueue addOperation:importOperation];
};
}
Cancellation of an NSOperation is just a request, a flag that is set in NSOperation. It's up to your NSOperation subclass to actually action that request and cancel it's work. You then need to ensure you have set the correct flags for isExecuting and isFinished etc. You will also need to do this in a KVO compliant manner. Only once these flags are set is the operation finished.
There is an example in the documentation Concurrency Programming Guide -> Configuring Operations for Concurrent Execution. Although I understand that this example may not correctly account for all multi-threaded edge cases. Another more complex example is provided in the sample code LinkedImageFetcher : QRunLoopOperation
If you think you are responding to the cancellation request correctly then you really need to post your NSOperation subclass code to examine the problem any further.
Instead of using your own flag for when it is ok to add more operations, you could try the
- (void)setSuspended:(BOOL)suspend
method on NSOperationQueue? And before adding a new operation, check if the queue is suspended with isSuspended?

Why use async HTTP request over sync HTTP in a separate thread?

I know about the difference between how each works but i want to know in a performance wise point of view (resources inside the iphone).
Lets say I send an asynch request and wait for the delegate to be called. This won't lock my execution thread. But what is the difference of doing this against just sending a synch request in another thread with GCD.
Like this:
dispatch_queue_t findPicsQueue;
findPicsQueue = dispatch_queue_create("FindPicsQueue", NULL);
dispatch_async(findPicsQueue, ^{
NSData *theResponse = [NSURLConnection sendSynchronousRequest:theRequest
returningResponse:&response
error:&error];
NSHTTPURLResponse *httpResponse = (NSHTTPURLResponse*)response;
if (error) {
NSLog(#"Error: %#",error)
}
if (httpResponse.statusCode == 200)
{
[self parseXMLFile:theResponse]; // Parses Data and modifies picturesFound
for (PictureData *tmp in picturesFound) {
NSLog(#"%#",tmp);
}
}
}
It wont lock my interface since its not being executed in the main thread, but it will lock this specific thread. And I also think GCD runs queues concurrently.
Thanks in advance. I really want to clarify this question.
If you use NSURLConnection with sendAsynchronousRequest, then almost all processing takes place on the main thread, in particular, the XML parsing will be done on the main thread. Your code example however uses a different thread for processing.
This difference is relevant if you have an iPhone or iPad processor with two cores. Then the XML parsing can run in parallel with some UI activity on the main thread (in your example). So it can be completed earlier compared to running everything on the main thread (sendAsynchronousRequest approach).
For older devices with just one core, only one thread will run at a time and the two approaches should behave almost identical.

Resources