This question already has answers here:
NSOperation vs Grand Central Dispatch
(9 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
Which tasks would be better suited to using NSOperation as opposed to using GCD when programming for the iPhone?
To me they seem to do the same thing. I can't see the strengths and weaknesses one has over the other.
NSOperation is built on top of GCD, so the question is more about whether you use NSOperation or pass a block directly to GCD.
An NSOperation is bulky and needs more boiler-plate codes to set it up, but it has a lot more functionality. You can create the same NSOperation subclass in various parts of your code and put them into the queue and run it.
Passing a block to GCD by e.g. dispatch_async is quick and disposable. You typically don't reuse a block anywhere else; you just set up a block which is executed only at that point of the code, passes it to the GCD or other APIs, and quickly go on.
So each has its merits.
Apparently, NSOperationQueue is built on GCD as of iOS 4; the docs just haven't been updated. Check this posting by an Apple employee here: https://devforums.apple.com/message/352770 (You may need to create an account) So, you should follow Mike Abdullah's advice and use the simplest API for the task at hand. dispatch_async is lower level, usually C-type stuff (but not limited to), and is good for one-shot and sequential type deals (fire this block on this queue, FTW). NSOperationQueues are higher level, Objective-C stuff, and are good if you are adding a lot of operations at various points in your code, and/or need to manage concurrency, priorities and dependencies. At least that's how I use them.
As always with such questions, use the simplest API available. Measure if it's a performance problem and then reevaluate if needed.
One thing that I don't believe has been mentioned here is that NSOperations can be cancelled during execution, whereas a block is guaranteed to complete once execution has begun. Having said that, a GCD queue can be suspended (dispatch_suspend()), so that any blocks following the currently executing blocks will not be executed.
Related
I'm learning about concurrent programming for iOS. So far I've read about NSOperation/NSOperationQueue and GCD. What are the reasons for using NSOperationQueue over GCD and vice versa?
Sounds like both GCD and NSOperationQueue abstract away the explicit creation of NSThreads from the user. However the relationship between the two approaches isn't clear to me so any feedback to appreciated!
GCD is a low-level C-based API that enables very simple use of a task-based concurrency model. NSOperation and NSOperationQueue are Objective-C classes that do a similar thing. NSOperation was introduced first, but as of 10.5 and iOS 2, NSOperationQueue and friends are internally implemented using GCD.
In general, you should use the highest level of abstraction that suits your needs. This means that you should usually use NSOperationQueue instead of GCD, unless you need to do something that NSOperationQueue doesn't support.
Note that NSOperationQueue isn't a "dumbed-down" version of GCD; in fact, there are many things that you can do very simply with NSOperationQueue that take a lot of work with pure GCD. (Examples: bandwidth-constrained queues that only run N operations at a time; establishing dependencies between operations. Both very simple with NSOperation, very difficult with GCD.) Apple's done the hard work of leveraging GCD to create a very nice object-friendly API with NSOperation. Take advantage of their work unless you have a reason not to.
Caveat:
On the other hand, if you really just need to send off a block, and don't need any of the additional functionality that NSOperationQueue provides, there's nothing wrong with using GCD. Just be sure it's the right tool for the job.
In line with my answer to a related question, I'm going to disagree with BJ and suggest you first look at GCD over NSOperation / NSOperationQueue, unless the latter provides something you need that GCD doesn't.
Before GCD, I used a lot of NSOperations / NSOperationQueues within my applications for managing concurrency. However, since I started using GCD on a regular basis, I've almost entirely replaced NSOperations and NSOperationQueues with blocks and dispatch queues. This has come from how I've used both technologies in practice, and from the profiling I've performed on them.
First, there is a nontrivial amount of overhead when using NSOperations and NSOperationQueues. These are Cocoa objects, and they need to be allocated and deallocated. In an iOS application that I wrote which renders a 3-D scene at 60 FPS, I was using NSOperations to encapsulate each rendered frame. When I profiled this, the creation and teardown of these NSOperations was accounting for a significant portion of the CPU cycles in the running application, and was slowing things down. I replaced these with simple blocks and a GCD serial queue, and that overhead disappeared, leading to noticeably better rendering performance. This wasn't the only place where I noticed overhead from using NSOperations, and I've seen this on both Mac and iOS.
Second, there's an elegance to block-based dispatch code that is hard to match when using NSOperations. It's so incredibly convenient to wrap a few lines of code in a block and dispatch it to be performed on a serial or concurrent queue, where creating a custom NSOperation or NSInvocationOperation to do this requires a lot more supporting code. I know that you can use an NSBlockOperation, but you might as well be dispatching something to GCD then. Wrapping this code in blocks inline with related processing in your application leads in my opinion to better code organization than having separate methods or custom NSOperations which encapsulate these tasks.
NSOperations and NSOperationQueues still have very good uses. GCD has no real concept of dependencies, where NSOperationQueues can set up pretty complex dependency graphs. I use NSOperationQueues for this in a handful of cases.
Overall, while I usually advocate for using the highest level of abstraction that accomplishes the task, this is one case where I argue for the lower-level API of GCD. Among the iOS and Mac developers I've talked with about this, the vast majority choose to use GCD over NSOperations unless they are targeting OS versions without support for it (those before iOS 4.0 and Snow Leopard).
GCD is a low-level C-based API.
NSOperation and NSOperationQueue are Objective-C classes.
NSOperationQueue is objective C wrapper over GCD.
If you are using NSOperation, then you are implicitly using Grand Central Dispatch.
GCD advantage over NSOperation:
i. implementation
For GCD implementation is very light-weight
NSOperationQueue is complex and heavy-weight
NSOperation advantages over GCD:
i. Control On Operation
you can Pause, Cancel, Resume an NSOperation
ii. Dependencies
you can set up a dependency between two NSOperations
operation will not started until all of its dependencies return true for finished.
iii. State of Operation
can monitor the state of an operation or operation queue.
ready ,executing or finished
iv. Max Number of Operation
you can specify the maximum number of queued operations that can run simultaneously
When to Go for GCD or NSOperation
when you want more control over queue (all above mentioned) use NSOperation
and for simple cases where you want less overhead
(you just want to do some work "into the background" with very little additional work) use GCD
ref:
https://cocoacasts.com/choosing-between-nsoperation-and-grand-central-dispatch/
http://iosinfopot.blogspot.in/2015/08/nsthread-vs-gcd-vs-nsoperationqueue.html
http://nshipster.com/nsoperation/
Another reason to prefer NSOperation over GCD is the cancelation mechanism of NSOperation. For example, an App like 500px that shows dozens of photos, use NSOperation we can cancel requests of invisible image cells when we scroll table view or collection view, this can greatly improve App performance and reduce memory footprint. GCD can't easily support this.
Also with NSOperation, KVO can be possible.
Here is an article from Eschaton which is worth reading.
GCD is indeed lower-level than NSOperationQueue, its major advantage is that its implementation is very light-weight and focused on lock-free algorithms and performance.
NSOperationQueue does provide facilities that are not available in GCD, but they come at non-trivial cost, the implementation of NSOperationQueue is complex and heavy-weight, involves a lot of locking, and uses GCD internally only in a very minimal fashion.
If you need the facilities provided by NSOperationQueue by all means use it, but if GCD is sufficient for your needs, I would recommend using it directly for better performance, significantly lower CPU and power cost and more flexibility.
Both NSQueueOperations and GCD allow executing heavy computation task in the background on separate threads by freeing the UI Application Main Tread.
Well, based previous post we see NSOperations has addDependency so that you can queue your operation one after another sequentially.
But I also read about GCD serial Queues you can create run your operations in the queue using dispatch_queue_create. This will allow running a set of operations one after another in a sequential manner.
NSQueueOperation Advantages over GCD:
It allows to add dependency and allows you to remove dependency so for one transaction you can run sequential using dependency and for other transaction run concurrently while GCD
doesn't allow to run this way.
It is easy to cancel an operation if it is in the queue it can be stopped if it is running.
You can define the maximum number of concurrent operations.
You can suspend operation which they are in Queue
You can find how many pending operations are there in queue.
GCD is very easy to use - if you want to do something in the background, all you need to do is write the code and dispatch it on a background queue. Doing the same thing with NSOperation is a lot of additional work.
The advantage of NSOperation is that (a) you have a real object that you can send messages to, and (b) that you can cancel an NSOperation. That's not trivial. You need to subclass NSOperation, you have to write your code correctly so that cancellation and correctly finishing a task both work correctly. So for simple things you use GCD, and for more complicated things you create a subclass of NSOperation. (There are subclasses NSInvocationOperation and NSBlockOperation, but everything they do is easier done with GCD, so there is no good reason to use them).
Well, NSOperations are simply an API built on top of Grand Central Dispatch. So when you’re using NSOperations, you’re really still using Grand Central Dispatch.
It’s just that NSOperations give you some fancy features that you might like. You can make some operations dependent on other operations, reorder queues after you sumbit items, and other things like that.
In fact, ImageGrabber is already using NSOperations and operation queues! ASIHTTPRequest uses them under the hood, and you can configure the operation queue it uses for different behavior if you’d like.
So which should you use? Whichever makes sense for your app. For this app it’s pretty simple so we just used Grand Central Dispatch directly, no need for the fancy features of NSOperation. But if you need them for your app, feel free to use it!
I agree with #Sangram and other answers but want to add few points. Correct me if I am wrong.
I think now a days first two points of #Sangram's answer are not valid (i. Control On Operation ii. Dependencies). We can achieve these two by using GCD also. Trying to explain by code(do not focus on quality of code, this is for reference purpose only)
func methodsOfGCD() {
let concurrentQueue = DispatchQueue.init(label: "MyQueue", qos: .background, attributes: .concurrent)
//We can suspend and resume Like this
concurrentQueue.suspend()
concurrentQueue.resume()
//We can cancel using DispatchWorkItem
let workItem = DispatchWorkItem {
print("Do something")
}
concurrentQueue.async(execute: workItem)
workItem.cancel()
//Cam add dependency like this.
//Operation 1
concurrentQueue.async(flags: .barrier) {
print("Operation1")
}
//Operation 2
concurrentQueue.async(flags: .barrier) {
print("Operation2")
}
//Operation 3.
//Operation 3 have dependency on Operation1 and Operation2. Once 1 and 2 will finish will execute Operation 3. Here operation queue work as a serial queue.
concurrentQueue.async(flags: .barrier) {
print("Operation3")
}
}
This question already has answers here:
Use of the terms "queues", "multicore", and "threads" in Grand Central Dispatch
(3 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
I am new to iOS development. Now I am quite confused about the two concepts: "thread" and "queue". All I know is that they both are about multithread programming. Can anyone interpret those two concepts and the difference between them for me?
Thanks in advance!
How NSOperationQueue and NSThread Works:
NSThread:
iOS developers have to write code for the work/process he want to perform along with for the creation and management of the threads themselves.
iOS developers have to be careful about a plan of action for using threads.
iOS developer have to manage posiable problems like reuseability of thread, lockings etc. by them self.
Thread will consume more memory too.
NSOperationQueue:
The NSOperation class is an abstract class which encapsulates the code and data associated with a single task.
Developer needs to use subclass or one of the system-defined subclasses of NSOperation to perform the task.
Add operations into NSOperationQueue to execute them.
The NSOperationQueue creates a new thread for each operation and runs them in the order they are added.
Operation queues handle all of the thread management, ensuring that operations are executed as quickly and efficiently as possible.
An operation queue executes operations either directly by running them on secondary threads or indirectly using GCD (Grand Central Dispatch).
It takes care of all of the memory management and greatly simplifies the process.
If you don’t want to use an operation queue, you can also execute an operation by calling its start method. It may make your code too complex.
How To Use NSThread And NSOperationQueue:
NSThread:
Though Operation queues is the preferred way to perform tasks concurrently, depending on application there may still be times when you need to create custom threads.
Threads are still a good way to implement code that must run in real time.
Use threads for specific tasks that cannot be implemented in any other way.
If you need more predictable behavior from code running in the background, threads may still offer a better alternative.
NSOperationQueue:
Use NSOperationQueue when you have more complex operations you want to run concurrently.
NSOperation allows for subclassing, dependencies, priorities, cancellation and a supports a number of other higher-level features.
NSOperation actually uses GCD under the hood so it is as multi-core, multi-thread capable as GCD.
Now you should aware about advantages and disadvantages of NSTread and NSOperation. You can use either of them as per needs of your application.
Before you read my answer you might want to consider reading this - Migrating away from Threads
I am keeping the discussion theoretical as your question does not have any code samples. Both these constructs are required for increasing app responsiveness & usability.
A message queue is a data structure for holding messages from the time they're sent until the time the receiver retrieves and acts on them. Generally queues are used as a way to 'connect' producers (of data) & consumers (of data).
A thread pool is a pool of threads that do some sort of processing. A thread pool will normally have some sort of thread-safe queue (refer message queue) attached to allow you to queue up jobs to be done. Here the queue would usually be termed 'task-queue'.
So in a way thread pool could exist at your producer end (generating data) or consumer end (processing the data). And the way to 'pass' that data would be through queues. Why the need for this "middleman" -
It decouples the systems. Producers do not know about consumers & vice versa.
The Consumers are not bombarded with data if there is a spike in Producer data. The queue length would increase but the consumers are safe.
Example:
In iOS the main thread, also called the UI thread, is very important because it is in charge of dispatching the events to the appropriate widget and this includes the drawing events, basically the UI that the user sees & interacts.
If you touch a button on screen, the UI thread dispatches the touch event to the app, which in turn sets its pressed state and posts an request to the event queue. The UI thread dequeues the request and notifies the widget to redraw itself.
I am confused on where to use which multithreading tool in iOS for hitting services and changing UI based on service data,
firstly I got accustomed to using NSURLConnection and its delegates, used didreceiveresponse, didreceivedata etc delegates to achieve the task
secondly I learned and used GCD to hit services and update the UI from within the block code
Now I am learning to use performSelectorInBackground() to do work in background thread
Clearly confused on which tool to use where?
NSURLConnection with delegate calls is "old school" way of receiving data from remote server. Also it's not really comfortable to use with few NSURLConnection instances in a single class (UIViewController or what not). Now it's better to use sendAsynchronousRequest.. method with completion handler. You can also define on which operation queue (main for UI, or other, background one) the completion handler will be run.
GCD is good for different tasks, not only fetching remote resources with initWithContentsOfURL: methods. You can also control what type of queues will receive your blocks (concurrent, serial ,etc.)
performSelectorInBackground: is also "old school" way of performing a method in background thread. If you weren't using ARC, you'd need to setup separate autorelease pool to avoid memory leaks. It also has a limitation of not allowing to accept arbitrary number of parameters to given selector. In this case it's recommended to use dispatch_async.
There are also NSOperationQueue with NSOperation and its subclasses (NSInvocationOperation & NSBlockOperation), where you can run tasks in the background as well as get notifications on main thread about finished tasks. IMHO They are more flexible than GCD in a way that you can create your own subclasses of operations as well as define dependencies between them.
The most important thing is, that you never change UI anyway in another thread except the main thread.
I think, that all points you mentioned use the same technique in the background: GDC. But I'm not sure of that.
Anyway it doesn't matter which tool you should use in terms of threading.
It's rather a question of your purpose. If you wan't to fetch an small image or just few data you can use contentsOfURLin a performSelectorInBackground() or a GDC dispatch block.
If it's about more data and more information like progress or error handling you should stick with *NSURLConnection`.
I suggest using GCD in all cases. Other techniques are still around but mainly for backward compatibility.
GCD is better for 3 reasons (at least):
It's extremely easy to use and the code remains very readable because of the use of blocks
It is lower level than things like NSOperation so it is much faster when you need high performance multi threading
It's lightweight and non-intrusive so your code doesn't have to change substantially when you want to add thread management in the middle of a method.
There are various questions around this topic, and lots of advice saying NOT to use sendSynchronousRequest within dispatch_async, because it blocks the thread, and GCD will spawn lots of new worker threads to service all the synchronous URL requests.
Nobody seems to have a definitive answer as to what iOS 5, [NSURLConnection sendAsynchronousRequest:queue:completionHandler:] does behind the scenes.
One post I read states that it 'might' optimise, and it 'might' use the run loop - but certainly won't create a new thread for each request.
When I pause my debugger when using sendAsynchronousRequest:queue:completionHandler, the stack trace looks like this:
..now it appears that sendAsynchronousRequest:queue:completionHandler, is actually calling sendSynchronousRequest, and I still have tons of threads created when I use the async method instead of the sync method.
Yes, there are other benefits to using the async call, which I don't want to discuss in this post.
All I'm interested in is performance / thread / system usage, and if i'm worse off using the sync call inside dispatch_async instead of using the async call.
I don't need advice on using ios4 async calls either, this is purely for educational purposes.
Does anyone have any insightful answers to this?
Thanks
This is actually open source. http://libdispatch.macosforge.org/
It is very unlikely that you will be able to manage the worker threads more efficiently than Apple's implementation. In this context "asynchronous" doesn't mean select/poll, it just means that the call will return immediately. So it is not surprising that the implementation is spawning threads.
As the previous answer stated, both GCD (libdispatch) and the libblocksruntime are open source. Internally, iOS/OS X manage a global pool of pthreads, plus any app-specific pools you create in your user code. Since there's a 1:N mapping between OS threads and dispatch tasks, you don't have to (and shouldn't) worry about thread creation and disposal under the hood. To that end, a GCD task doesn't use any time in an app's run loop after invocation as it's punted to a background thread.
Most kinds of NSURL operations are I/O-bound; there's no amount of concurrency voodo that can disguise this, but if Apple's own async implementation uses its synchronous counterpart in the background, it probably suggests it's quite highly optimized already. Contrary to what the previous answer said, libdispatch does use scalable I/O internally (kqueue on OS X/iOS/BSD), and if you hand-rolled something yourself you'd have to deal with file-descriptor readiness yourself to yield similar performance.
While possible, the return on time invested is probably marginal. Stick with Apple's implementation and stop worrying about threads!
I'm learning about concurrent programming for iOS. So far I've read about NSOperation/NSOperationQueue and GCD. What are the reasons for using NSOperationQueue over GCD and vice versa?
Sounds like both GCD and NSOperationQueue abstract away the explicit creation of NSThreads from the user. However the relationship between the two approaches isn't clear to me so any feedback to appreciated!
GCD is a low-level C-based API that enables very simple use of a task-based concurrency model. NSOperation and NSOperationQueue are Objective-C classes that do a similar thing. NSOperation was introduced first, but as of 10.5 and iOS 2, NSOperationQueue and friends are internally implemented using GCD.
In general, you should use the highest level of abstraction that suits your needs. This means that you should usually use NSOperationQueue instead of GCD, unless you need to do something that NSOperationQueue doesn't support.
Note that NSOperationQueue isn't a "dumbed-down" version of GCD; in fact, there are many things that you can do very simply with NSOperationQueue that take a lot of work with pure GCD. (Examples: bandwidth-constrained queues that only run N operations at a time; establishing dependencies between operations. Both very simple with NSOperation, very difficult with GCD.) Apple's done the hard work of leveraging GCD to create a very nice object-friendly API with NSOperation. Take advantage of their work unless you have a reason not to.
Caveat:
On the other hand, if you really just need to send off a block, and don't need any of the additional functionality that NSOperationQueue provides, there's nothing wrong with using GCD. Just be sure it's the right tool for the job.
In line with my answer to a related question, I'm going to disagree with BJ and suggest you first look at GCD over NSOperation / NSOperationQueue, unless the latter provides something you need that GCD doesn't.
Before GCD, I used a lot of NSOperations / NSOperationQueues within my applications for managing concurrency. However, since I started using GCD on a regular basis, I've almost entirely replaced NSOperations and NSOperationQueues with blocks and dispatch queues. This has come from how I've used both technologies in practice, and from the profiling I've performed on them.
First, there is a nontrivial amount of overhead when using NSOperations and NSOperationQueues. These are Cocoa objects, and they need to be allocated and deallocated. In an iOS application that I wrote which renders a 3-D scene at 60 FPS, I was using NSOperations to encapsulate each rendered frame. When I profiled this, the creation and teardown of these NSOperations was accounting for a significant portion of the CPU cycles in the running application, and was slowing things down. I replaced these with simple blocks and a GCD serial queue, and that overhead disappeared, leading to noticeably better rendering performance. This wasn't the only place where I noticed overhead from using NSOperations, and I've seen this on both Mac and iOS.
Second, there's an elegance to block-based dispatch code that is hard to match when using NSOperations. It's so incredibly convenient to wrap a few lines of code in a block and dispatch it to be performed on a serial or concurrent queue, where creating a custom NSOperation or NSInvocationOperation to do this requires a lot more supporting code. I know that you can use an NSBlockOperation, but you might as well be dispatching something to GCD then. Wrapping this code in blocks inline with related processing in your application leads in my opinion to better code organization than having separate methods or custom NSOperations which encapsulate these tasks.
NSOperations and NSOperationQueues still have very good uses. GCD has no real concept of dependencies, where NSOperationQueues can set up pretty complex dependency graphs. I use NSOperationQueues for this in a handful of cases.
Overall, while I usually advocate for using the highest level of abstraction that accomplishes the task, this is one case where I argue for the lower-level API of GCD. Among the iOS and Mac developers I've talked with about this, the vast majority choose to use GCD over NSOperations unless they are targeting OS versions without support for it (those before iOS 4.0 and Snow Leopard).
GCD is a low-level C-based API.
NSOperation and NSOperationQueue are Objective-C classes.
NSOperationQueue is objective C wrapper over GCD.
If you are using NSOperation, then you are implicitly using Grand Central Dispatch.
GCD advantage over NSOperation:
i. implementation
For GCD implementation is very light-weight
NSOperationQueue is complex and heavy-weight
NSOperation advantages over GCD:
i. Control On Operation
you can Pause, Cancel, Resume an NSOperation
ii. Dependencies
you can set up a dependency between two NSOperations
operation will not started until all of its dependencies return true for finished.
iii. State of Operation
can monitor the state of an operation or operation queue.
ready ,executing or finished
iv. Max Number of Operation
you can specify the maximum number of queued operations that can run simultaneously
When to Go for GCD or NSOperation
when you want more control over queue (all above mentioned) use NSOperation
and for simple cases where you want less overhead
(you just want to do some work "into the background" with very little additional work) use GCD
ref:
https://cocoacasts.com/choosing-between-nsoperation-and-grand-central-dispatch/
http://iosinfopot.blogspot.in/2015/08/nsthread-vs-gcd-vs-nsoperationqueue.html
http://nshipster.com/nsoperation/
Another reason to prefer NSOperation over GCD is the cancelation mechanism of NSOperation. For example, an App like 500px that shows dozens of photos, use NSOperation we can cancel requests of invisible image cells when we scroll table view or collection view, this can greatly improve App performance and reduce memory footprint. GCD can't easily support this.
Also with NSOperation, KVO can be possible.
Here is an article from Eschaton which is worth reading.
GCD is indeed lower-level than NSOperationQueue, its major advantage is that its implementation is very light-weight and focused on lock-free algorithms and performance.
NSOperationQueue does provide facilities that are not available in GCD, but they come at non-trivial cost, the implementation of NSOperationQueue is complex and heavy-weight, involves a lot of locking, and uses GCD internally only in a very minimal fashion.
If you need the facilities provided by NSOperationQueue by all means use it, but if GCD is sufficient for your needs, I would recommend using it directly for better performance, significantly lower CPU and power cost and more flexibility.
Both NSQueueOperations and GCD allow executing heavy computation task in the background on separate threads by freeing the UI Application Main Tread.
Well, based previous post we see NSOperations has addDependency so that you can queue your operation one after another sequentially.
But I also read about GCD serial Queues you can create run your operations in the queue using dispatch_queue_create. This will allow running a set of operations one after another in a sequential manner.
NSQueueOperation Advantages over GCD:
It allows to add dependency and allows you to remove dependency so for one transaction you can run sequential using dependency and for other transaction run concurrently while GCD
doesn't allow to run this way.
It is easy to cancel an operation if it is in the queue it can be stopped if it is running.
You can define the maximum number of concurrent operations.
You can suspend operation which they are in Queue
You can find how many pending operations are there in queue.
GCD is very easy to use - if you want to do something in the background, all you need to do is write the code and dispatch it on a background queue. Doing the same thing with NSOperation is a lot of additional work.
The advantage of NSOperation is that (a) you have a real object that you can send messages to, and (b) that you can cancel an NSOperation. That's not trivial. You need to subclass NSOperation, you have to write your code correctly so that cancellation and correctly finishing a task both work correctly. So for simple things you use GCD, and for more complicated things you create a subclass of NSOperation. (There are subclasses NSInvocationOperation and NSBlockOperation, but everything they do is easier done with GCD, so there is no good reason to use them).
Well, NSOperations are simply an API built on top of Grand Central Dispatch. So when you’re using NSOperations, you’re really still using Grand Central Dispatch.
It’s just that NSOperations give you some fancy features that you might like. You can make some operations dependent on other operations, reorder queues after you sumbit items, and other things like that.
In fact, ImageGrabber is already using NSOperations and operation queues! ASIHTTPRequest uses them under the hood, and you can configure the operation queue it uses for different behavior if you’d like.
So which should you use? Whichever makes sense for your app. For this app it’s pretty simple so we just used Grand Central Dispatch directly, no need for the fancy features of NSOperation. But if you need them for your app, feel free to use it!
I agree with #Sangram and other answers but want to add few points. Correct me if I am wrong.
I think now a days first two points of #Sangram's answer are not valid (i. Control On Operation ii. Dependencies). We can achieve these two by using GCD also. Trying to explain by code(do not focus on quality of code, this is for reference purpose only)
func methodsOfGCD() {
let concurrentQueue = DispatchQueue.init(label: "MyQueue", qos: .background, attributes: .concurrent)
//We can suspend and resume Like this
concurrentQueue.suspend()
concurrentQueue.resume()
//We can cancel using DispatchWorkItem
let workItem = DispatchWorkItem {
print("Do something")
}
concurrentQueue.async(execute: workItem)
workItem.cancel()
//Cam add dependency like this.
//Operation 1
concurrentQueue.async(flags: .barrier) {
print("Operation1")
}
//Operation 2
concurrentQueue.async(flags: .barrier) {
print("Operation2")
}
//Operation 3.
//Operation 3 have dependency on Operation1 and Operation2. Once 1 and 2 will finish will execute Operation 3. Here operation queue work as a serial queue.
concurrentQueue.async(flags: .barrier) {
print("Operation3")
}
}