IOS how to wait until `didReceiveData` handler is called - ios

Im developing ios application which is getting data from the web server. I want everything else to wait, until one of the handlers of this class is called and completed. I know it is possible by using dispatch/threads, but i just can't figure out how.
-(void)callWebService:(NSString*)URL:(NSString*)SOAP{
NSURL *url = [NSURL URLWithString:URL];
NSMutableURLRequest *req = [NSMutableURLRequest requestWithURL:url];
[req setHTTPMethod:#"POST"];
[req setHTTPBody:[SOAP dataUsingEncoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding]];
NSURLConnection *con = [[NSURLConnection alloc] initWithRequest:req delegate:self];
if(con){
[con start];
}
}
and at the end of this method continues code outside this class. but i want to wait until this handler is called (and completed):
-(void)connection:(NSURLConnection *)c didReceiveData:(NSData *)data{
NSString *res = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:data encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding];
NSLog(#"%#",res);
Ukol_Parser *parser = [Ukol_Parser alloc];
[parser parseUkol:res];
}
because the parser here puts data into sqlite db and outside this class data are being read. But the "outside" code is being executed faster than i get response and handler is called....

If you want "everything else to wait", then it sounds like what you really want to do are synchronous requests.
Check out [NSURLConnection sendSynchronousRequest:returningResponse:error:]
However, make sure to do this thing on a background thread because if you do it on the main thread, your UI will block and your app will look unresponsive to user touches or anything else.

I'm nervous that you accepted the answer regarding sendSynchronousRequest from the background queue because, from a practical perspective, this is no different than your didReceiveData-based implementation. Specifically, if you do perform synchronous request from a background queue, it will not make "everything else wait".
But if you neglect to do this synchronous request from the background queue (i.e. if you do it from the main thread), you end up with a horrible UX (the app is frozen and the user is wondering whether the app has crashed), and worse, your app could be killed by the iOS "watchdog process" if it takes too long.
With all deference to the various answers, sending a synchronous request on a background queue is indistinguishable from the existing NSURLConnectionDataDelegate-based approach. What you really need to do is accept the fact that the rest of the app will not freeze, and therefore simply update the UI to let the user know what's happening, namely that (a) provide some visual cue that the app is not dead; and (b) prevent the user from interacting with your existing UI.
For example, before issuing your network request, add a view that will cover/dim the rest of your UI, prevent user interaction with the existing UI, and add a spinner to let the user know that the app is busy doing something. So, define a class property for a UIView that will dim the rest of the UI:
#property (nonatomic, strong) UIView *dimView;
And then, before the network request, update the UI:
// add a view that dims the rest of the UI, so the user has some visual cue that they can't use the UI yet
// by covering the whole UI, you're effectively locking the user out of using the app
// until the network request is done
self.dimView = [[UIView alloc] initWithFrame:self.view.bounds];
self.dimView.backgroundColor = [[UIColor blackColor] colorWithAlphaComponent:0.5];
self.dimView.autoresizingMask = UIViewAutoresizingFlexibleWidth | UIViewAutoresizingFlexibleHeight;
[self.view addSubview:self.dimView];
// add a spinner that shows the user that something is really happening
UIActivityIndicatorView *indicatorView = [[UIActivityIndicatorView alloc] initWithActivityIndicatorStyle:UIActivityIndicatorViewStyleWhiteLarge];
indicatorView.center = self.dimView.center;
indicatorView.autoresizingMask = UIViewAutoresizingFlexibleLeftMargin | UIViewAutoresizingFlexibleRightMargin | UIViewAutoresizingFlexibleTopMargin | UIViewAutoresizingFlexibleBottomMargin;
[indicatorView startAnimating];
[self.dimView addSubview:indicatorView];
[self callWebService:URL withSOAP:SOAP];
And then, in the connectionDidFinishLoading method (or if you used sendSynchronousRequest from a background queue, in the latter portion of code to dispatched to that background queue), after you finish parsing your data, you want to:
[self.dimView removeFromSuperview];
self.dimView = nil;
// now do what ever to need do to update your UI, e.g.:
//
// [self.tableView reloadData]
But the key is that you absolutely do not want to issue a synchronous network request from the main queue. You should (a) do your network request asynchronously (either synchronously on a background queue, or as you originally implemented) so that the iOS watchdog process doesn't kill your app; (b) let the user know the app is making some network request and hasn't frozen on them (e.g. a UIActivityIndicatorView; and (c) when the request is done, remove these "the app is doing network request" UI elements and refresh the rest of the UI now that your network request is done.
Finally, when testing your app, make sure you test it in real-world networking situations. I'd suggest you install the Hardware IO tools (available in Xcode menu, under "Open Developer Tools" - "More Developer Tools") and check out the Network Link Conditioner. This lets you simulate real-world network situations (e.g. a bad 3G or Edge network condition) on the iOS simulator. We get lulled into a false sense of performance when we test our apps in typical development environments with ideal network connectivity. Devices "in the wild" suffer a wide range of degraded network situations, and it's good to test your app in a similar, suboptimal network situation.

kind of a wild solution, but this actually worked https://gist.github.com/62940 :D

use synchronous calls . but It'd change the design of your class because a synchronous call will block and leave the app hanging

Post a notification from your didReceiveData: method, and have your other class observe that notification (or you could use a delegate setup, if it's easy to get a reference to this class from the other so you can set your other class as the delegate of this one). In the notification's selector method, start executing the rest of your code.

Related

Recursive / Iterative NSURLSessionDataTask causing memory leak

I am having a problem with memory leaking in my code, I have a need to GET many URL's in quick succession, each GET is influenced by the result of the previous GET. The purpose is to look for a specific piece of content within the response.
I found the cleanest way to implement this is recursively, as I can use the same method to identify if the desired value is present in the response. Functionally it works very well, but it leaks memory as described below. I have also implemented the same functionality in an iterative fashion, and this also leaks memory.
To my mind it seems that the NSURLSession API is responsible for leaking this memory, and it only occurs when multiple calls are made in very quick succession. However, I would appreciate if anyone can point out any obvious mistakes I am making.
Update 10/09/14:
Updated to add a recursion counter, demonstrating the leak still occurs even if the code isn't executed an infinite number of times. Also tidied up the implementation slightly, re-using the NSURLSession and NSURLSessionConfiguration as properties within the view controller.
Sample Code:
- (void)performURLCallRecursive {
recursionLimiter++;
if (recursionLimiter > 10) {
[self.session finishTasksAndInvalidate];
return;
}
NSURL * checkURL = [NSURL URLWithString:#"http://www.google.com"];
__block NSMutableURLRequest * urlRequest = [[NSMutableURLRequest alloc] initWithURL:checkURL
cachePolicy:NSURLRequestReloadIgnoringLocalCacheData
timeoutInterval:0.0f];
__weak typeof(self) weakSelf = self;
NSURLSessionDataTask * task = [self.session dataTaskWithRequest:urlRequest
completionHandler:^(NSData *data, NSURLResponse *response, NSError
*error) {
NSString * body = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:data encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding];
NSLog(#"Body: %#", body);
[weakSelf performURLCallRecursive];
}];
[task resume];
}
#pragma mark - Getters
- (NSURLSessionConfiguration *)sessionConfiguration {
if (!_sessionConfiguration) {
_sessionConfiguration = [NSURLSessionConfiguration ephemeralSessionConfiguration];
[_sessionConfiguration setAllowsCellularAccess:NO];
[_sessionConfiguration setTimeoutIntervalForRequest:10.0f];
[_sessionConfiguration setTimeoutIntervalForResource:10.0f];
[_sessionConfiguration setURLCache:[[NSURLCache alloc] initWithMemoryCapacity:0 diskCapacity:0 diskPath:nil]];
}
return _sessionConfiguration;
}
- (NSURLSession *)session {
if (_session == nil) {
_session = [NSURLSession sessionWithConfiguration:self.sessionConfiguration
delegate:[SPRSessionDelegate new]
delegateQueue:nil];
}
return _session;
}
The memory leaks as reported by instruments. (NB: These vary slightly every time, but for the most part contain the same leaks, just more or less of the same leaks):
Further Update:
So, I actually implemented the same code iteratively, and the memory leak still occurs. For this example I included a loop limiter so it doesn't execute for ever. Can anyone help me figure out what on earth is going on here?
- (void)performURLCallIterative
{
int loopLimiter = 0;
do {
NSURLSessionConfiguration * defaultSession = [NSURLSessionConfiguration defaultSessionConfiguration];
[defaultSession setAllowsCellularAccess:NO];
[defaultSession setTimeoutIntervalForRequest:10.0f];
[defaultSession setTimeoutIntervalForResource:10.0f];
NSURLSession * session = [NSURLSession sessionWithConfiguration:defaultSession
delegate:self
delegateQueue:nil];
NSURL * checkURL = [NSURL URLWithString:#"http://google.com"];
NSMutableURLRequest * urlRequest = [[NSMutableURLRequest alloc] initWithURL:checkURL
cachePolicy:NSURLRequestReloadIgnoringLocalCacheData
timeoutInterval:0.0f];
__weak NSURLSession * weakSession = session;
dispatch_semaphore_t semaphore = dispatch_semaphore_create(0);
NSURLSessionDataTask * task = [session dataTaskWithRequest:urlRequest
completionHandler:^(NSData *data, NSURLResponse *response, NSError *error) {
NSString * body = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:data encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding];
NSLog(#"Body: %#", body);
dispatch_semaphore_signal(semaphore);
[weakSession invalidateAndCancel];
}];
[task resume];
dispatch_semaphore_wait(semaphore, DISPATCH_TIME_FOREVER);
loopLimiter++;
} while (loopLimiter <= 6);
}
Update 10/09/14:
This is still occurring on iOS 8 for any Googlers who may have found their way here. As far as I am concerned this is a bug in iOS.
- Update 9/12/2014
Solution: wait for iOS8.
- Update 9/10/2014
Whoa, this is spiraling into some Nth dimension of complexity :P. I hope one way or another you get a break here quick.
I have a few other things for you to try.
1) Could you make sure NSZombies is turned off. In Xcode, Product->Scheme->Edit Scheme...->Enable Zombie Objects (NOT ticked).
2) Also try cachePolicy:NSURLCacheStorageNotAllowed for your NSMutableURLRequest.
3) Could you see if you are completing with an error? Just put this around your body string assignment...
if (error == nil)
{
//Enter data->string code here
}
4) Could you see if you are not getting status 200?
NSInteger statusCode = [(NSHTTPURLResponse *)response statusCode];
5) It is hard to picture exactly how your project is set up. I would have an NSObject type class that houses the NSURLSession methods, which is separate from the UIViewController class from which it is being called. The timer or whatever recursion method you wish to choose would then call the url session associated methods from the UIViewController.
- Update 9/9/2014
You are correct about my question (2). The data task is resumed before completion and after the data task completes the session is invalidated. I haven't seen it done this way, but it makes sense. Just tested on my end, no leaks with regards to [session invalidateAndCancel]...
Could you check that your completion handler executes? Perhaps it doesn't and the session is never cancelled before a new task is started?
I am noticing that there are a few references to HTTP Headers in the Instruments Leaks report, maybe if you are not specifying either a [urlRequest setHTTPMethod:#"GET"] the request is missing some basic headers?
(I'll edit after we find the solution, so this doesn't look like a discussion).
- Original 9/8/2014
Interesting question! I have troubleshot leaks associated with NSURLSessions. Definitely #autoreleasepool{} and others are good suggestions to try so far... But!
I am afraid the thing you asked us to look past might be the culprit here.
Just a few observations first:
1) It is not clear to me why you would need to __weak the self here. What is the retain cycle you are trying to avoid? Perhaps this is more clear in the code you are actually using aside from your "sample".
2) What is the reason for the call to invalidate the session before the data task associated with that session even has a chance to complete, let alone resume. The data task is in the suspended state until resumed.
3) If you are recursively running a method like this, then I think it is crucial to specify or at least consider what delegate queue, otherwise having it set to nil defaults it to serial operation queue. What happens when the delegate calls before the completion handler finishes, in an infinite loop - most likely a huge pile up.
--
I believe that the main issue here is that you are starting a new or canceling the NSURLSessionDataTask before it has a chance to complete. Look at +sesssionWithConfiguration:
(sorry can't include pictures yet, hopefully after this answer)
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Foundation/Reference/NSURLSession_class/Introduction/Introduction.html#//apple_ref/occ/clm/NSURLSession/sessionWithConfiguration:
The point is here...
Important
The session object keeps a strong reference to the delegate
until your app explicitly invalidates the session. If you do not
invalidate the session by calling the invalidateAndCancel or
resetWithCompletionHandler: method, your app leaks memory.
My suggestion to try is...
//Your code above...
[task resume];
[session finishTasksAndInvalidate];
}
In theory this should prevent any new sessions from starting before completion, according to the description, "...new tasks cannot be created in the session, but existing tasks continue until completion. After the last task finishes and the session makes the last delegate call, references to the delegate and callback objects are broken..."
I am still not sure about invalidating the session before resuming it.
I hope this helps. Good luck.
A developer support request to Apple reveals this to be a bug within iOS 7. There is no fault with the code sample posted above (Either recursively or iteratively) and it has reportedly been fixed in the iOS 8 GM release.
Update:
This is still occurring in iOS 8.1
I had a lot of problems with memory from NSURLSession and I finally fixed it by not using a new session for each request. Sessions are generally defined on Wikipedia as:
a semi-permanent interactive information interchange
As such, Apple's convenience class method [NSURLSession sharedSession] gives us a clue of how NSURLSession objects are intended to be used: as semi-permanent objects, not one-off objects created fresh for each request, like you are doing.
You are making a new session object per request for a ton of requests that, from the server's perspective, are all part of a single session with a single client.
I was doing the same thing until I realized this was the source of my woes. I did not find Apple's documentation on this very clear, but after I realized the error of my ways, it made certain things in the documentation suddenly make more sense, like why there is a sharedSession singleton convenience method of NSURLSession, why the word "tasks" is plural in finishTasksAndInvalidate, why they called it a "session", why it has a cache, etc. (If it was just for one request, why would it be a "session" and what good would a "cache" be?)
It helps to know how a browser like Safari looks at a session. A new session starts the first time you make a connection to a given server. Setting up the session involves creating a cache of SSL certificates, establishing authentication, handshaking, etc. It would be extraordinarily inefficient to do all of that every time some JavaScript on a page makes a new request to the same server, especially since modern web apps constantly make requests with callbacks etc. That is why a single session is established for a whole huge set of requests and responses -- a conversation, if you will, between the client and server. Eventually, a session expires, but usually this happens after several minutes, not after one request!
The point is, how you should be using NSURLSession objects is to make a singleton with a strongly referenced NSURLSession object as a property. Do this if you need to customize the session's configuration, (like turning caching off, etc.). However if you do not need to customize it, just use Apple's sharedSession.
If you use a singleton on a custom class, then, if you never need to set the session property to nil, then you never need to invalidateAndCancel or finishTasksAndInvalidate. Instead, just resetWithCompletionBlock or flushWithCompletionBlock to clear out connection caches periodically.
If you hate singletons you can still use a session as a property, just make sure to invalidateAndCancel or finishTasksAndInvalidate the session before its last owner gets deallocated by the ARC runtime.
Also note that setting your NSURLSession object's URLCache property to nil is the proper way to shut off caching. That's what Apple says they do for backgroundSessionConfiguration.
See my other answers on this topic here and here.
The only suggestions I have are perhaps using an #autoreleasepool{} and converting the __weak id self to __block id self. I don't think the __block vs. __weak will do anything differently, but give it a shot.
I'm not sure what one should expect with ARC when running something asynchronously AND recursively. Looking at other questions with asynchronous recursive calls and ARC, there isn't any consistent solution. Take a look here, for example.

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?

Queuing NSURLRequest to simulate a synchronous, blocking request

I am interacting with a web-controlled hardware device. You send it a request via a URL (e.g., http://device/on?port=1 or http://device/off?port=3) to turn stuff on and off, and it sends back "success" or "failure". It is a simple device, however, so while it's processing a request --- i.e., until it returns the status of the request that it's processing --- it will ignore all subsequent requests. It does not queue them up; they just get lost.
So I need to send serial, synchronous requests. I.e., req#1, wait for response#1, req#2, wait for response#2, req#3, wait for response #3, etc.
Do I need to manage my own thread-safe queue of requests, have the UI thread push requests into one end of the queue, and have another thread pull the requests off, one at a time, as soon as the previous one either completes or times out, and send the results back to the UI thread? Or am I missing something in the API that already does this?
Thanks!
...R
What should work is to use an NSOperationQueue instance, and a number of NSOperation instances that perform the various URL requests.
First, set up a queue in the class that will be enqueueing the requests. Make sure to keep a strong reference to it, i.e.
#interface MyEnqueingClass ()
#property (nonatomic, strong) NSOperationQueue *operationQueue;
#end
Somewhere in the implementation, say the init method:
_operationQueue = [[NSOperationQueue alloc] init];
_operationQueue.maxConcurrentOperationCount = 1;
You want basically a serial queue, hence the maxConcurrentOperationCount of 1.
After setting this up, you'll want to write some code like this:
[self.operationQueue addOperationWithBlock:^{
NSURLRequest *request = [NSURLRequest requestWithURL:[NSURL URLWithString:#"my://URLString"]];
NSError *error;
NSURLResponse *response;
NSData *responseData = [NSURLConnection sendSynchronousRequest:request returningResponse:&response error:&error];
if (!responseData)
{
//Maybe try this request again instead of completely restarting? Depends on your application.
[[NSOperationQueue mainQueue] addOperationWithBlock:^{
//Do something here to handle the error - maybe you need to cancel all the enqueued operations and start again?
[self.operationQueue cancelAllOperations];
[self startOver];
}];
}
else
{
//Handle the success case;
}
}];
[self.operationQueue addOperationWithBlock:^{
//Make another request, according to the next instuctions?
}];
In this way you send synchronous NSURLRequests and can handle the error conditions, including by bailing out completely and starting all over (the lines with -cancelAllOperations called). These requests will be executed one after the other.
You can also of course write custom NSOperation subclasses and enqueuing instances of those rather than using blocks, if that serves you.
Hope this helps, let me know if you have any questions!
You can use NSOperationQueue class and also use some API which are build in on it for example AFNetworking.

How to make program wait for asynchronous NSURLConnection to finish before proceeding with next command?

How can I make my program wait for an asynchronous NSURLConnection to finish before going to the next line of code?
SetDelegate *sjd= [SetDelegate alloc];
NSURLConnection *connection = [[NSURLConnection alloc]initWithRequest:post delegate:sjd];
[connection start];
This is how I start the connection and I handle the data received in the delegate but I want to wait for the connection to end before proceeding mainly because this is in a for loop and it has to run for each element in my database.
I need to put data from the phones database to a remote database and after the data was successfully put in the data in the phones database is deleted. I am going through each element in the phone's database and start a connection that's why I don't see how the next stuff can be done from the loop. I'm a beginner when it comes to objective-c programming so I'm not sure if this is the right way or not to do it
Making the call synchronous is not an option because it blocks the program and i have a progress bar that should show.
Your question is a bit odd. You have impossibly constrained the issue. You cannot have a line of code "wait" for a process to finish w/o it blocking something, in this case whatever thread the loop is running in.
You can use a synchronous call if you wanted to, it doesn't block your app, it only blocks the thread it is executed on. In your example, you have a loop that is continually getting remote data and you want your UI to reflect that until it is done. But you don't want your UI blocked. That means, this thread with your loop already MUST be on a background thread so you can feel free to do a synchronous call in the loop w/o blocking your UI thread. If the loop is on the UI thread you need to change this to do what you want.
You could also do this using an asynchronous connection. In that case, your operation may actual complete faster b/c you can have multiple requests in progress at the same time. If you do it that way, your loop can remain on the UI thread and you just need to track all of the connections so that when they are finished you can communicate that status to the relevant controllers. You'll need iVars to track the loading state and use either a protocol or NSNotification to communicate when loading is done.
EDIT: ADDED EXAMPLE OF SYNCHRONOUS CALL ON BACKGROUND THREAD
If you want the loop to finish completely only when all requests are finishes and not block your UI thread here's a simple example:
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
// post an NSNotification that loading has started
for (x = 0; x < numberOfRequests; x++) {
// create the NSURLRequest for this loop iteration
NSURLResponse *response = nil;
NSError *error = nil;
NSData *data = [NSURLConnection sendSynchronousRequest:request
returningResponse:&response
error:&error];
// do something with the data, response, error, etc
}
// post an NSNotification that loading is finished
});
Whatever objects need to show loading status should observe and handle the notifications you post here. The loop will churn through and make all your requests synchronously on a background thread and your UI thread will be unblocked and responsive. This isn't the only way to do this, and in fact, I would do it using async connections myself, but this is a simple example of how to get what you want.
If you just want to know when it's complete and don't really care about any data, simply use the NSNotificationCenter to post a notification and have your view subscribe to it.
Delegate - Post Notification upon completion
-(void) connectionDidFinishLoading:(NSURLConnection*)connection {
[[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] postNotificationName:#"NSURLConnectionDidFinish" object:nil];
}
View - Add observer and run some code when observed
-(void) viewDidLoad {
[[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] addObserver:self
selector:#selector(yourCleanupMethod)
name:#"NSURLConnectionDidFinish"
object:nil];
}
-(void) yourCleanupMethod {
// finish up
[[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] removeObserver:self];
}
Now, if you need to pass a simple object back as data you can try loading up the object parameter in your notification like this:
[[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] postNotificationName:#"NSURLConnectionDidFinish" object:yourDataObject];
Then change your view and cleanup signature like this:
-(void) viewDidLoad {
// Notice the addition to yourCleanupMethod
[[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] addObserver:self
selector:#selector(yourCleanupMethod:)
name:#"NSURLConnectionDidFinish"
object:nil];
}
-(void) yourCleanupMethod:(NSNotification *)notif {
// finish up
id yourDataObject = [notif object];
[[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] removeObserver:self];
}
Now I found myself needing something a little more than this so I ended up creating a singleton to handle all of my requests. Since all of your delegate methods in NSURLConnectionDelegate give you and instance of the NSURLConnection for the specific connection, you can simply store a mutable data object in a dictionary and look it up each time by the connection. From there I have a method signature that takes and object and selector in that I associate with the connection so after everything has wrapped up, I can pass that mutable data object to the requestor by performing the selector on that object.
I won't include all of that code here but maybe that will help get you thinking about what is possible. I found that I had a lot of code tied up in making web service calls so wrapping everything up in a singleton gave me a nice clean way of getting data. Hope this helps!
If you really want it to wait, why use an asynchronous call at all? Use a synchronous call instead:
NSURLResponse* response = nil;
NSData* data = [NSURLConnection sendSynchronousRequest:urlRequest returningResponse:&response error:nil]
This approach will block the thread it's executed, so you should be sure you want to do it! Did I mention that it will block? :)
You say you want to wait for an asynchronous call to complete, so I'm assuming you're calling the code you posted up in a separate thread.
I would recommend having a look at the new sendAsynchronourRequest method. I've posted up an example of how you can wrap this up in a class which would inform its delegate when the connection has completed / timed out / failed. I'm only referring you to this post because it sounds like you're trying to achieve something very similar to what I was at the time, and this DownloadWrapper class worked flawlessly for me. It's new in iOS5, mind you.
This golden nugget helped me!
I was using synchronous NSURL just fine until I decided I needed SSL for my connection between my client and my server. I took the approach of key pinning which is comparing the cert on the device to the cert on the server (read more on link above) and in order for it to work I needed to add code to the NSURL methods, which from my research you can't do with NSURL synchronous.
Until I found this ridiculously simple solution which worked for me:
NSString *connectionRunLoopMode = #"connectionRunLoopMode";
NSURLConnection *connection = [[NSURLConnection alloc]initWithRequest:urlRequest delegate:urlConnectionDelegate startImmediately:NO];
NSRunLoop *currentRunLoop = [NSRunLoop currentRunLoop];
[connection unscheduleFromRunLoop:currentRunLoop forMode:NSDefaultRunLoopMode];
[connection scheduleInRunLoop:currentRunLoop forMode:connectionRunLoopMode];
[connection start];
while ([currentRunLoop runMode:connectionRunLoopMode beforeDate:[NSDate distantFuture]]);
NSURLConnection is already asynchronous. Simply implement the delegate methods. If you want to update the UI on the MainThread (e.g. a progress bar), you can do so in didReceiveData.
or look at this

Resources