at the heart of it, my app will ask the user for a bunch of numbers, store them via core data, and then my app is responsible for showing the user the average of all these numbers.
So what I figure I should do is that after the user inputs a new number, I could fire up a new thread, fetch all the objects in a NSFetchDescription instance and call it on my NSManagedObjectContext, do the proper calculations, and then update the UI on the main thread.
I'm aware that the rule for concurrency in Core Data is one thread per NSManagedObjectContext instance so what I want to know is, do you I think can what I just described without having my app explode 5 months down the line? I just don't think it's necessary to instantiate a whole a new context just to do some measly calculations...
Based on what you have described, why not just store the numbers as they are entered into a CoreData model and also into an NSMutableArray? It seems as though you are storing these for future retrieval in case someone needs to look at (and maybe modify) a previous calculation. Under that scenario, there is no need to do a fetch after a current set of numbers is entered. Just use a mutable array and populate it with all the numbers for the current calculation. As a number is entered, save it to the model AND to the array. When the user is ready to see the average, do the math on the numbers in the already populated array. If the user wants to modify a previous calculation, retrieve those numbers into an array and work from there.
Bottom line is that you shouldn't need to work with multiple threads and merging Contexts unless you are populating a model from a large data set (like initial seeding of a phonebook, etc). Modifying a Context and calling save on that context is a very fast thing for such a small change as you are describing.
I would say you may want to do some testing, especially in regard to the size of the data set. if it is pretty small, the sqlite calls are pretty fast so you may get away with doing in on the main queue. But if it is going to take some time, then it would be wise to get it off the main thread.
Apple introduced the concept of parent and child managed object contexts in 2011 to make using MO contexts on different threads easier. you may want to check out the WWDC videos on Core Data.
You can use NSExpression with you fetch to get really high performance functions like min, max, average, etc. here is a good link. There are examples on SO
http://useyourloaf.com/blog/2012/01/19/core-data-queries-using-expressions.html
Good luck!
Related
I am thinking about how to best represent a certain data structure efficiently in Swift using CoreData. What I need is work with accounts (like savings, earning etc.). So what would probably make sense is an account class, where each account instance might have multiple characteristics like e.g. ACCOUNT_TYPE_ID which do not change. The core however is the VALUE attribute, which would hold the value of the account at a certain point in time. The complex thing here is that this value obviously might change over time (lets say on a daily basis, abstracting for intra-day changes) and I would need to be able to get the value of each instance for any given date. E.g. I might have my savings_private for which I would want to get the value at each month-end. This value might have changed, but as well could stay the same for various days/months. How could this most efficiently (when it comes to used space but - and that is even more important - be able to access computationally efficient) be done with a CoreData Entity/Class? I was thinking about maybe always starting with zero and then only somehow save the changes plus the date of change and then have some method for the call which would add all changes up to a date parameter - but was curious about what a best-practice might be here, as I guess I am not the first one trying to solve this.
Have I understood this correctly please.
When you are running a web application to view pages and you create an instance of the context is that instance loading all the database date into it?
If it does does that not take up a lot of memory a blog with five years of blogs could have 1,500 to 2,000 (or more)post in it, with all the comments tags etc that would be a great deal of data.
So what does happen when you create the instance of a context?
A context only loads the records that you request, so when you first instantiate one it will be empty and won't perform any queries against the database until you tell it to. Any entities you load through it will (usually) be cached within the context, though, so they use more and more memory every time you run a query and can become very large over time.
For that reason, and because contexts are relatively cheap to instantiate, it's a good idea to only keep them alive while you actually need them, and dispose of them as soon as you're done. This is part of the "unit of work" pattern -- basically using a new context for each set of operations that go together as one unit or transaction.
Edited to add:
If you're performing read-only queries (i.e. you just want to display data, you don't need to make changes and save them back to the database), you might check out non-tracking queries (e.g. the .AsNoTracking() method if you're using a DbContext/DbSet, or the MergeOption.NoTracking property if you're using an ObjectContext/ObjectSet) -- that will avoid caching the results in the context, increasing performance and reducing memory use.
Like the native iPhone Messages app, I want to code AcaniChat to return the last 50 messages sorted chronologically. Let's say there are 200 messages total in Core Data.
I know I can use fetchOffset=150 & fetchLimit=50 (Actually, do I even need fetchLimit in this case since I want to fetch all the way to the end?), but can I fetch the last 50 messages without first having to fetch the messages count? For example, with Redis, I could just set fetchOffset to -50.
Reverse the sort order, and grab the first 50.
EDIT
But then, how do I display the messages in chronological order? I'm
using an NSFetchedResultsController. – MattDiPasquale
That wasn't part of your question now, was it ;-)
Anyhow, the FRC is not used directly. Your view controller is asked to provide the information, and it then asks the FRC. You can do simple math to transform section/row to get the reverse order.
You could also use a second array internally that has a copy of the objects in the FRC, but with a different sort ordering. That's simple as well.
More complex, but more "academically interesting" is using a separate MOC with custom fetch parameters.
However, before I went too far down either path, I'd want to know what's so wrong with querying the count of objects. It's actually quite fast.
Until I had proof from Instruments that it's the bottleneck that's killing my app, I'd push for the simplest solution possible.
I'm developing an iPhone application and am new to Objective-C as well as SQLite. That being said, I have been struggling w/ designing a practical data management solution that is worthy of existing. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Here's the deal:
The majority of the data my application interacts with is stored in five tables in the local SQLite database. Each table has a corresponding Class which handles initialization, hydration, dehydration, deletion, etc. for each object/row in the corresponding table. Whenever the application loads, it populates five NSMutableArrays (one for each type of object). In addition to a Primary Key, each object instance always has an ID attribute available, regardless of hydration state. In most cases it is a UUID which I can then easily reference.
Before a few days ago, I would simply access the objects via these arrays by tracking down their UUID. I would then proceed to hydrate/dehydrate them as I needed. However, some of the objects I have also maintain their own arrays which reference other object's UUIDs. In the event that I must track down one of these "child" objects via it's UUID, it becomes a bit more difficult.
In order to avoid having to enumerate through one of the previously mentioned arrays to find a "parent" object's UUID, and then proceed to find the "child's" UUID, I added a DataController w/ a singleton instance to simplify the process.
I had hoped that the DataController could provide a single access point to the local database and make things easier, but I'm not so certain that is the case. Basically, what I did is create multiple NSMutableDicationaries. Whenever the DataController is initialized, it enumerates through each of the previously mentioned NSMutableArrays maintained in the Application Delegate and creates a key/value pair in the corresponding dictionary, using the given object as the value and it's UUID as the key.
The DataController then exposes procedures that allow a client to call in w/ a desired object's UUID to retrieve a reference to the actual object. Whenever their is a request for an object, the DataController automatically hydrates the object in question and then returns it. I did this because I wanted to take control of hydration out of the client's hands to prevent dehydrating an object being referenced multiple times.
I realize that in most cases I could just make a mutable copy of the object and then if necessary replace the original object down the road, but I wanted to avoid that scenario if at all possible. I therefore added an additional dictionary to monitor what objects are hydrated at any given time using the object's UUID as the key and a fluctuating count representing the number of hydrations w/out an offset dehydration. My goal w/ this approach was to have the DataController automatically dehydrate any object once it's "hydration retainment count" hit zero, but this could easily lead to significant memory leaks as it currently relies on the caller to later call a procedure that decreases the hydration retainment count of the object. There are obviously many cases when this is just not obvious or maybe not even easily accomplished, and if only one calling object fails to do so properly I encounter the exact opposite scenario I was trying to prevent in the first place. Ironic, huh?
Anyway, I'm thinking that if I proceed w/ this approach that it will just end badly. I'm tempted to go back to the original plan but doing so makes me want to cringe and I'm sure there is a more elegant solution floating around out there. As I said before, any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
I'd also be aware (as I'm sure you are) that CoreData is just around the corner, and make sure you make the right choice for the future.
Have you considered implementing this via the NSCoder interface? Not sure that it wouldn't be more trouble than it's worth, but if what you want is to extract all the data out into an in-memory object graph, and save it back later, that might be appropriate. If you're actually using SQL queries to limit the amount of in-memory data, then obviously, this wouldn't be the way to do it.
I decided to go w/ Core Data after all.
SqlDataReader is a faster way to process the stored procedure. What are some of the advantage/disadvantages of using SQLDataReader?
I assume you mean "instead of loading the results into a DataTable"?
Advantages: you're in control of how the data is loaded. You can ask for specific data types, and you don't end up loading the whole set of data into memory all at the same time unless you want to. Basically, if you want the data but don't need a data table (e.g. you're going to populate your own kind of collection) you don't get the overhead of the intermediate step.
Disadvantages: you're in control of how the data is loaded, which means it's easier to make a mistake and there's more work to do.
What's your use case here? Do you have a good reason to believe that the overhead of using a normal (or strongly typed) data table is significantly hurting performance? I'd only use SqlDataReader directly if I had a good reason to do so.
The key advantage is obviously speed - that's the main reason you'd choose a SQLDataReader.
One potential disadvantage not already mentioned is that the SQLDataReader is forward only, so you can only go through the records once in sequence - that's one of the things that allows it to be so fast. In many cases that's fine but if you need to iterate over the records more than once or add/edit/delete data you'll need to use one of the alternatives.
It also remains connected until you've worked through all the records and close the reader (of course, you can opt to close it earlier, but then you can't access any of the remaining records). If you're going to perform any lengthy processing on the records as you iterate over them, you may find that you impact other connections to the database.
It depends on what you need to do. If you get back a page of results from the database (say 20 records), it would be better to use a data adapter to fill a DataSet, and bind that to something in the UI.
But if you need to process many records, 1 at a time, use SqlDataReader.
Advantages: Faster, less memory.
Disadvantages: Must remain connected, must remember to close the reader.
The data might not be concluesive and you are not in control of your actions that why the milk man down the road has always got to carry data with him or else they gona get cracked by the data and the policeman will not carry any data because they think that is wrong to keep other people's data and its wrong to do so. There is a girl who lives in Sheffield and she loves to go out and play most the times that she s in the house that is why I dont like to talk to her because her parents and her other fwends got taken to peace gardens thats a place that everyone likes to sing and stay. usually famous Celebs get to hang aroun dthere but there are always top security because we dont want to get skanked down them ends. KK see u now I need 2 go and chill in the west end PEACE!!!£"$$$ Made of MOney MAN$$$$