We have native applications that run on Android, iOS, and Windows mobile. For other devices (such as BlackBerry) a mobile web solution. These applications currently do an initial large pull from our CMS and then parse XML from our CMS as its datastore. This data is then available offline on the device. We're looking for something more elegant than XML as we scale.
Here are options that we are weighing:
Option 1. Export a sqlite DB to Android, iOS, and Windows 7 phone that they would all then use as its datastore.
Pros: CMS exports the same data format to all devices
Cons: iOS isn't using CoreData like everything I've been reading says I should be using.
Option 2. Export sqlite DB to all platforms but have iOS insert data into CoreData. We are toying with idea of having CMS export JSON format to iOS and have iOS insert into CoreData since our delta updates to the application will be in JSON.
Pros: iOS is using CoreData and all of its benefits.
Cons: iOS now strays from all our other platforms such that it needs an intermediate solution (converting data into CoreData storage.)
Curious if anyone has mobile applications on various platforms that require persistent stores and how your team tackled it.
3/22/2013 for minor clarification and grammatical changes.
Stumbled upon this solution while doing research:
https://github.com/AlexDenisov/iActiveRecord
It behaves similarly to CoreData, such that it utilizes object graphs. It constructs the SQL statements behind the scenes for you so that you do not need to concern yourself with writing queries.
What I like about this solution is that iActiveRecord points to our exported SQLite DB from our CMS (which utilizes django) and we simply define our Obj-C class to match the schemas of the table (similar to defining data models in CoreData.) After the class schemas are defined to reflect our table schemas, we can start using objects without worrying about sql queries.
CoreData could not do this since it required us to write a "converter" to get exported data from our CMS into CoreData's datastore.
Of course all the extra bells and whistles of CoreData are missing, but for our use cases, utilizing iActiveRecord out weighed other options.
The real question is: can you really reuse any code on these platforms? Not much. Probably, too little to worry about it. In fact, if you don't have a common C/C++ library (in a broad sense, as in a set of functions) to process data in an SQLite database, there's not much code to reuse.
There may be cases where you heavily depend on certain SQL queries for good performance. Those queries may turn out to be very inefficient in Core Data. In this scenario I would go with SQLite and FMDB.
If the queries are simple enough and you mainly need to display/edit the data, then going with Core Data will be easier.
Related
I am developing iPhone app for a web application currently running online. Current web application is big and complex and uses SQL to store vital information like member details, login credentials etx. Other stuffs like info about several sections, groups, sub groups and other information related to each are saved in txt. Current system uses its own standard to keep data in files and also made custom algorithm to read and write data in it. Each txt file is below 1 mb size. There are lot of data manipulations going on.
Custom algorithm created just read those files and put all data in cache as records (same as in core data managedobjectcontext) and whenever there is a change in data the whole file is overwritten.
So while implementing the same what I want to choose for iPhone app? In apple website they said that 'SQLite is perfect for low-level relational database work' https://developer.apple.com/technologies/ios/data-management.html But in my case it is high level.
So please help me to make a decision. Do I want to manage data in files or sqlite database using core data?
I would also like to know whether it is possible to import those classes and algorithms currently in webserver to iOS, so I don't want to rewrite the same algorithm for iOS? Current server codes are in C#
In the rare case that you need to do low-level relational database work use SQLite. In the 99% other cases use Core Data. Don't ever store relational stuff into txt files. It'll just be a pain.
Your use case sounds like a good match for Core Data.
Often misunderstood, Core Data is an object store that happens to use sqlite for persistence. You don't manipulate the sqlite underneath it, Core Data manage the sqlite for you. You do not write SQL. The closest match to it in .NET is EDM and the Entity Framework in ADO.NET.
Assuming the classes and algorithm you want to import in the webserver is in C#, sadly those needed to be ported to Obj-C.
I am creating a Questions and answers app for iphone which allows user to answer the questions displayed.
Currently I am invoking a web service to store the users answers. But I am slightly worried what if the web service goes down. I need to store the users answers locally and then invoke the web service when it is up and running.
How can I store the users answers when the web service is down. Is Sqllite a good option for this?
Please suggest.
Thanks,
Is Sqllite a good option for this?
Yes, SQLite is decidedly a good option. The other choice would be Core Data.
Use CoreData or SQLite on iPhone?
It depends on the complexity of your data model. I've looked into something like this recently and here is what I learnt. The most popular data storage methods in the iPhone are:
plist
Good for small quantities (hundreds of Ks) of hierarchical data.
Bad if relationships or queries are complex (since you have to write the code).
Very easy to learn.
Supports array, dict, string, data, date, integer, real, boolean elements.
You can store it as XML, which is editable and portable, or as binary files, which is faster.
Core Data
It's a object graph manager with searching and persistent functionality.
You need a good few hours of learning.
Easy to use once you set it up.
Better than a plist because it lets you manage object graphs, grow your object model, write queries, undo/redo, migrations to modified data models, memory management, and handle concurrent access.
Better than SQLite because:
The performance is similar and the speed of development is faster.
Creating objects is faster.
When the objects are in memory, executing queries doesn't require a search in the backend (which usually is either memory or SQLite).
SQLite
A database.
Better than Core Data when the operation doesn't require you to bring objects to memory. Example: update, delete, and select 1 (see if something exists).
It has full text search if you compile the extension.
Hardest to learn. Easier if you use a wrapper: FMDB, egodatabase.
If you can get away with a plist do that. If you see the amount of code you will have to write is too much work, then switch to Core Data. Only if you are an expert and absolutely need the performance use SQLite (unless, of course, you already know SQLite and not Core Data).
It should be, yes. I'd set up a Core Data based app with entities for Questions and Answers and set up relationships between them. Then just use NSFetchedResultsController or whatever you would like to gather and display the data
You have several options:
Sqlite
Core Data
Client-Side storage
If you wish to go the web based route, I'd take a quick look at Safari Client-Side Storage and Offline Applications Programming Guide.
Basically, you store a local copy of the database in memory so incase the web service is down, users can still use the app.
I've been looking into creating a new application for iOS and after my last few apps I've been tempted to use CoreData (for benefits including saving and automatic undo/redo).
I've been a little confused when trying to implement the data-model I've been given fr the project though, since it seems that CoreData seems very much much closer to a database than a data model.
Should I be using CoreData for an application that doesn't generally fit the 'large amount of data/records' description I would generally use an SQL style database for?
If it helps, the app I'm designing will be a sort of document editor, so there will be a number of objects I will need to represent (there might be embedded images, graphs/charts, hyperlinks etc within the document) and I need to create this model from an xml description.
Most of these 'items' need to implement a set of interfaces (the model was created for a Java product; I'm having difficulties seeing how inheritance and abstract interfaces can apply to CoreData), and every example I've found so far seems to add base elements (like an NSDate or String) to a simple model.
Does this sound like a candidate for CoreData, or is CoreData more of a tool for implementing a database in an application? (i.e a library system/staff database).
consider CoreData as an option once you are able to properly write the majority of the code it will replace. so once you know how to properly serialize/deserialize, write undo/redo, KVO, copying, etc.
Should I be using CoreData for an
application that doesn't generally fit
the 'large amount of data/records'
description I would generally use an
SQL style database for?
CoreData isn't restricted to large databases (at all) - it will work well with small sets, and beyond databases (binary files and documents, direct in memory use of models).
your example could benefit from CoreData. it depends on the amount of custom code you need - sometimes it is just easier to write the code if you're just using CD objects as an interface generator, and your app uses a lot of custom code/objects. to be honest, i've never used CoreData in a shipping app - i always found reasons to migrate models to existing code before then (assuming CoreData was also used during development/modeling stages).
it's a nice framework, but it shouldn't be viewed as a 'magic object generator' that will solve most problems. first, you need to understand he technologies/patterns you intend to replace with it. there is a limited number of ideal uses for it. if you can't write the code the objects depend on, don't bother using CoreData. iow - don't consider it as a replacement for initial effort because there are certainly times when it is a good choice and a bad choice - but you can't make an objective answer for your context if you don't (truly) understand what it is capable of.
One of the purposes of Core Data is managing an object graph in memory. This certainly fits your application. It can then be persisted to disk easily. Using a tool such as mogenerator allows you to use Core Data to manage the object life cycle, graph and persistence, but add your custom protocols on top.
In short, yes, you can use Core Data for non-database uses, with a bit of work to conform to the model.
I've prototyped an iPhone app that uses (internally) SQLite as its data base. The intent was to ultimately have it communicate with a server via PHP, which would use MySQL as the back-end database.
I just discovered Google App Engine, however, but know very little about it. I think it'd be nice to use the Python interface to write to the data store - but I know very little about GQL's capability. I've basically written all the working database code using MySQL, testing internally on the iPhone with SQLite. Will GQL offer the same functionality that SQL can? I read on the site that it doesn't support join queries. Also is it truly relational?
Basically I guess my question is can an app that typically uses SQL backend work just as well with Google's App Engine, with GQL?
I hope that's clear... any guidance is great.
True, Google App Engine is a very cool product, but the datastore is a different beast than a regular mySQL database. That's not to say that what you need can't be done with the GAE datastore; however it may take some reworking on your end.
The most prominent different that you notice right off the start is that GAE uses an object-relational mapping for its data storage scheme. Essentially object graphs are persisted in the database, maintaining there attributes and relationships to other objects. In many cases ORM (object relational mappings) map fairly well on top of a relational database (this is how Hibernate works). The mapping is not perfect though and you will find that you need to make alterations to persist your data. Also, GAE has some unique contraints that complicate things a bit. One contraint that bothers me a lot is not being able to query for attribute paths: e.g. "select ... where dog.owner.name = 'bob' ". It is these rules that force you to read and understand how GAE data store works before you jump in.
I think GAE could work well in your situation. It just may take some time to understand ORM persistence in general, and GAE datastore in specifics.
GQL offers almost no functionality at all; it's only used for SELECT queries, and it only exists to make writing SELECT queries easier for SQL programmers. Behind the scenes, it converts your queries to db.Query objects.
The App Engine datastore isn't a relational database at all. You can do some stuff that looks relational, but my advice for anyone coming from an SQL background is to avoid GQL at all costs to avoid the trap of thinking the datastore is anything at all like an RDBMS, and to forget everything you know about database design. Specifically, if you're normalizing anything, you'll soon wish you hadn't.
I think this article should help you.
Summary: Cloud computing and software development for handheld devices are two very hot technologies that are increasingly being combined to create hybrid solutions. With this article, learn how to connect Google App Engine, Google's cloud computing offering, with the iPhone, Apple's mobile platform. You'll also see how to use the open source library, TouchEngine, to dynamically control application data on the iPhone by connecting to the App Engine cloud and caching that data for offline use.
That's a pretty generic question :)
Short answer: yes. It's going to involve some rethinking of your data model, but yes, changes are you can support it with the GAE Datastore API.
When you create your Python models (think of these as tables), you can certainly define references to other models (so now we have a foreign key). When you select this model, you'll get back the referencing models (pretty much like a join).
It'll most likely work, but it's not a drop in replacement for a mySQL server.
We're beginning development of an in-house app in the iPhone Enterprise developer program. Since it's close to OS 3.0, we're reconsidering our original design of using SQLite and using Core Data instead. Here's some more info:
There is a legacy desktop application that this is replacing. We will reuse the existing back end.
We currently have a SQLite database generated as a proof of concept. This is basically a cut down version of the existing back end database.
We will be loading data from a remote site and storing it locally, where it will persist and need to be . We only update it if it has changed, which will be every month or two. We will most likely use XML or JSON to transfer the data.
There are two developers on this project and we both have strong SQL skills but neither one has used Core Data.
My questions are: what is the benefit of Core Data over SQLite, what would the benefit be in this specific instance and do the benefits justify learning a new framework instead of using existing strong SQL skills?
EDIT:
I just noticed this question: Core Data vs SQLite 3. I guess my questions therefore are:
If I have to check if a specific item either exists or has an update, which is easy using SQL, does Core Data still make sense? Can I load the first object in a graph and check the version number without loading the whole graph?
If we already know SQL, does the advantages of Core Data for this one project justify us learning it?
As you've read Core Data vs SQLite 3, you know that Core Data and the persistence mechanism (SQLite in this case) are largely orthogonal. Core Data is really about managing an object graph and it's main use case is for the model component of an MVC architecture. If your application fits nicely into this architecture, it's probably worth using Core Data as it will save you a lot of code in the model component. If you already have a working model component (e.g. from the existing desktop app), then Core Data won't buy you much. A hybrid approach is possible-- you can do your own persistence/querying and build a Core Data in memory store which you populate with the result of a query and use this in-memory store via Core Data as the model component for your app. This isn't common, but I've done it and there are no major roadblocks.
To answer your specific questions:
You can assign a version number to the entire persistent store and retrieve that information via +[NSPersistentStore metadataForPersistentStoreWithURL:error:], without even opening the store. An equivalent +setMetadata:forPersistentStoreWithURL:error also exists, of course. If you want to store the version info in an entity instance instead of in the persistent store metadata, you can load only a single object. With an SQLite persistent store, Core Data does a very good job of fetching only what you need.
The NSPredicate API, is very easy to learn and it seems to do a decent job of compilation to SQL. At least for databases of the size you could fit on an iPhone it's certainly been adequate (performance wise) in my experience. I think the SQL vs. Core Data question is slightly misguided, however. Once you get the result of a query what are you going to do with it? If you roll your own, you'll have to instantiate objects, handle faulting/uniqueing (if you don't want to load the entire result of a query into memory immediately) and all of the other object graph management facilities already provided by Core Data.
It sounds like you already have the project designed using SQLite, and you have experience in that area.
So the bottom line is, does it make sense to port this project, will Core Data give me anything that I didn't already have in my original design?
Assuming that the original design was done properly, based on the requirements ON THIS PROJECT, it's probably not worth it.
But that's not the end of the discussion. There are other things to think about: Will my next project have such light database requirements? Do I need to ship soon, due to timeline or budget constraints? Assuming I'm going to have to learn Core Data sooner or later, doesn't it make sense to do it now? Am I possibly interested in porting my code over to the Mac?
The answers to these questions may lead you to the decision that yes, it is indeed worth it to go back to the drawing board so to speak, and learn what Core Data is all about.
To get to your final question: What are the advantages? Well, Core Data is a higher level abstraction of your database, it is also data store agnostic (so if a future version of the iPhone were to ditch SQLite for an embedded version of MySQL... unlikely, but it's an example) then Core Data would require VERY few changes to the code to make it work with the new data store. Core Data will provide a great deal of quick portability to the Mac platform. Core Data will handle versioning of your data model, whereas unless you have a framework or a workflow to manage it, direct access to SQLite won't.
I'm sure other answerers can come up with other advantages, and maybe some good reasons why NOT to mess with Core Data. Incidentally, in a similar situation, my decision was to port to the higher level, newer framework. But in my case, it was for a side project, and ship date and budget were non-factors.
Not to detract from this forum, but you might find more respondents with contextually relevant experience at the Apple iPhone DevForum.
Speaking from a purely project management perspective, it sounds like you know how to build what you want to build using SQLite, and so it would make more sense to me for you to start along that route.
That being said, CoreData builds on top of SQLite and if you are trying to leverage other parts of the system in conjunction with your data, e.g. using KVC/KVO or bindings, then you may quickly find that this functionality is worth the learning curve.
= Mike