I have in my app a considerable amount of data that it needs to access, but will never be changed by the app. Currently I'm using this data in other applications in JSON files and SQL databases, but neither seems very straightforward to use in iOS.
I don't want to use CoreData, which provides tons of unnecessary functionality and complexity.
Would it be a good idea store the data in PropertyList file and build an accessor class? Are there any simple ways to incorporate SQLite without going the CoreData route?
You can only use plist if the amount of data is relatively small. Plist are entirely loaded into memory so you can only really use them if you can sustain all the objects created by the plist in memory at once for as long as you need them.
Core Data has a learning curve but in use it is usually less complex than SQL. In most cases the "simpler" SQL leads to more coding because you end up having to duplicate much of the functionality of Core Data to shoehorn the procedural SQL into the object-oriented API. You have to manually manage the memory use of all the data by tracking retention. You've write a lot of SQL code every time you want data. I've updated several apps from SQL to Core Data and in all cases the Core Data implementation was smaller and cleaner than the SQL.
Neither is the memory or processor "overhead" any larger. Core Data is highly optimized. In most cases, off the shelf Core Data is more efficient than hand tuned SQL. One minor sub optimization in SQL usually destroys any theoretical advantage it might have.
Of course, if you're already highly skilled at managing SQL in C then you personally might get the app to market more quickly by using SQL. However, if you're wondering what you should plan to use in general on on Apple Platforms, Core Data is almost always the answer and you should take the time to learn it.
You can just use SQLite directly without the overhead of Core Data using the SQLite C API.
Here is a tutorial I found on your use-case - simply loading some data from an SQLite database. Hope this helps.
Depending on the type of your data, the size and how often it changes, you may desire to just keep things simple and use a property list. Otherwise, using SQLite (documented in Jergason's answer) would be where I'd go. Though let me say that if you have a relatively small (less than a couple hundred) set of basic types (arrays, dictionaries, numbers, strings) that don't change frequently, then a property list will be a better choice in my opinion.
As an example to that, in one of my games, I create the levels from a single property list per difficulty. Since there are only a handful of levels per difficulty (99) and a small set of parameters for each (number of elements in play, their initial positions, mass, etc) then it makes sense, and I avoid having to deal with SQLite directly or worse yet, setting up and maintaining CoreData.
What do you mean by "best"? What kind of data?
If it's a bunch of objects, then JSON or (binary) plist aren't terrible formats, since you'll want the whole thing loaded in memory to walk the object graph. Compare space efficiency and loading performance to pick which one to use.
If it's a bunch of binary blobs, then store the blobs in a big file, memory-map the file (NSDataReadingMapped a.k.a. NSMappedRead), and use indexes into the blobs. iOS frameworks use a mixture of these (e.g. there are a lot of .pngs, but also "other.artwork" which just contains raw image data).
You can also use NSKeyedArchiver and friends if your classes implement the NSCoding protocol, but there's some object graph management overhead and the plist format it produces isn't exactly nice to work with.
Related
I need to know what should I use to store the property?
I'm still confused. Should I use SQLit or core data?
I will have a lot of data, user data and real estate data. It will also appear in the map.
Core Data contains sqlite as a storage facility. It's not an actual database, but rather a graph database.
SQLite on the other hand is a database. Different methodology, can be used for small chunks of data (I use it extensively) efficiently and mostly to implement a pure RDBMS system (with primary/foreign key, unions, and stuff like this, SQL powered).
For Core Data, you use graph relationships (which means objects connected to other objects by references).
The outcome is the same, different programming though, depending on the complexity you want to have (or actually have designed) in your app, so lay down your plans to see which one suits you. For SQLite I recommend FMDB wrapper, since it's easier instead of doing 2 to 3 checks for every SQL statement.
Your app seems interesting, and since it's real estate based you might want to spice it up a little bit later with a small technology called "augmented reality" :)
Does using an NSFetchedResultsController provide any performance advantages on the iPhone over an NSArray?
I have between 4,000 and 8,000 records stored in core data and wanted to know if I should select one over the other. Is the NSFetchedResultsController just used to make code 'prettier'?
My concern is searching, and lag on keyboard button presses (as well as the issue of loading that many records into memory). Thanks!
Given your parameters, Core Data will be faster than an array especially if you make any changes to the data.
The disadvantage of an array in this case is that you have to load the entire array into memory in one go.
It might seem obvious that Core Data will be slower than more primitive methods but owing to fine tuned optimization plus the ease of integration with the rest of the API it is actually fairly hard to beat Core Data in real world apps with significant amounts of data.
My plan is to display a list of items alphabetically in a table view that has about 100 items. Each item has an image, a list of times and a description that the tableview will drill down to. What I am struggling with is the correct way to store and load this data. Some have told me that a plist will be too data heavy and that core data is too new. Should I just create arrays?
You're not clear about what you intend to do with this data. Plists and Core Data are both persistence formats (on disk). Arrays are an in-memory format (and can also be slapped onto disk, I suppose, if that's what you want to do, but inventing your own binary disk format is only something you should consider very rarely, and certainly not in the case you probably have).
In memory, you can probably just use an array (NSArray) and have each element perhaps be an NSDictionary of the other properties relative to that entry. That sounds like the model of your MVC design, which you can then hook up to the table view.
As far as persisting this to disk, it depends on whether 100 items is a fixed amount, a ballpark, or a minimum, etc. Plists (see NSKeyedArchiver) are great for all the data except possibly the raw image data-- you might want to keep those "to the side" as separate image files with filenames in the plist.
I don't know much about Core Data, but it's not that new, and it's not untested, so if it does what you want without much hassle, go for it.
Serialize it into an Archive using NSCoding Protocol. See Guide.
I'd use an NSArray of business objects implementing NSCoding and then just archive them.
I usually default to Core Data unless I have a compelling reason not to. (Of course, I have learned Core Data so that makes it easy for me to this.)
Core Data has the following advantages:
It has an editor in which you can create complex object graphs easily
It can generate custom classes for you data model objects.
The generated classes are easily modified.
Core Data manages the complexity of adding, deleting and saving objects.
Core Data makes persisting an object graph almost invisible.
NSFetchedResultsController is custom designed to provide data for tables.
100 objects is a small graph that Core Data can handle easily. It's a lot easier to use Core Data than it is to write custom coders to archive custom objects. For exmaple, at present, I have an app with over a dozen major entities each with two or three relationships to other entities. Hand coding all that would be a nightmare.
Core Data has something of a steep learning curve especially if you've never worked with object graphs before but if you're planning on writing a lot of Apple platform software, learning it is well worth the time.
I'm experimenting with Core Data, plist files, flat files and sqlite.
I can't seem to differentiate in terms of efficiency for small data sets.
In terms of the differences on the surface ( i.e the API ), i know the difference.
But what I'm trying to get a feel for is which persistence model is best for which situation.
For small data sets, if you need read - write capability, you should go with NSUserDefaults - if gives you the power of key-value store and retrieval without too much hassle.
If you need read-only access, plist files are a viable option, as it keeps the abstraction to the concept of key-value and offers an accessible API to work with.
Flat files would be recommended if you need a different model of persistence than key-value, otherwise it would mean just reinventing the wheel.
Sqlite would fit the case where your data is organized in a strong relational manner and instead of key-value, you'd rather prefer having the power of sql to work directly with your data.
If for your dataset, however small it may be, would be an unnecessary inconvenience to manage the low-level storage and retrieval, then you could choose CoreData. With CoreData, code can retrieve and manipulate data on a purely object level without having to worry about the details of storage and retrieval, so you'd be more focused on your domain logic rather than fitting it to the storage and data manipulation logic.
I have an object graph in Objective-C on the iPhone platform that I wish to persist to flash when closing the app. The graph has about 100k-200k objects and contains many loops (by design). I need to be able to read/write this graph as quickly as possible.
So far I have tried using NSCoder. This not only struggles with the loops but also takes an age and a significant amount of memory to persist the graph - possibly because an XML document is used under the covers. I have also used an SQLite database but stepping through that many rows also takes a significant amount of time.
I have considered using Core-Data but fear I will suffer the same issues as SQLite or NSCoder as I believe the backing stores to core-data will work in the same way.
So is there any other way I can handle the persistence of this object graph in a lightweight way - ideally I'd like something like Java's serialization? I've been thinking of trying Tokyo Cabinet or writing the memory occupied by bunch of C structs out to disk - but that's going to be a lot of rewrite work.
I would reccomend re-writing as c structs. I know it will be a pain, but not only will it be quick to write to disk but should perform much better.
Before anyone gets upset, I am not saying people should always use structs, but there are some situations where this is actually better for performance. Especially if you pre-allocate your memory in say 20k contiguous blocks at a time (with pointers into the block), rather than creating/allocating lots of little chunks within a repeated loop.
ie if your loop continually allocates objects, that is going to slow it down. If you have preallocated 1000 structs and just have an array of pointers (or a single pointer) then this is a large magnitude faster.
(I have had situations where even my desktop mac was too slow and did not have enough memory to cope with those millions of objects being created in a row)
Rather than rolling your own, I'd highly recommend taking another look at Core Data. Core Data was designed from the ground up for persisting object graphs. An NSCoder-based archive, like the one you describe, requires you to have the entire object graph in memory and all writes are atomic. Core Data brings objects in and out of memory as needed, and can only write the part of your graph that has changed to disk (via SQLite).
If you read the Core Data Programming Guide or their tutorial guide, you can see that they've put a lot of thought into performance optimizations. If you follow Apple's recommendations (which can seem counterintuitive, like their suggestion to denormalize your data structures at some points), you can squeeze a lot more performance out of your data model than you'd expect. I've seen benchmarks where Core Data handily beat hand-tuned SQLite for data access within databases of the size you're looking at.
On the iPhone, you also have some memory advantages when using controlling the batch size of fetches and a very nice helper class in NSFetchedResultsController.
It shouldn't take that long to build up a proof-of-principle Core Data implementation of your graph to compare it to your existing data storage methods.