What's the preferred approach for constantly sharing data across threads when using Core Data? I am downloading a large file and want to show progress of the download in a UIProgressBar. The actual download is happening in a background thread created by NSOperation.
The download information (local path, total bytes, bytes received) is modeled as a Core Data managed object, and the actual file is stored in the Documents/ directory. One solution that came to my mind was to create a separate managed object context in the background thread and pass it the objectID and pull it up using the objectWithID: method. Whenever the background thread does a save, the main thread gets a notification and the main context merges those changes and the table view is subsequently updated.
This approach works, but the save can't be done too frequently or the UI freezes up. So the UI is updated after every X KB's of data is received where X has to be at least 500 KB for the UI to be somewhat responsive. Is there a better approach to pass the download progress data to the main thread as it is received?
EDIT: Would using KVO be of any help? If yes, do you know of any good tutorials on the topic?
I know you already built your own system, but I use ASIHTTPRequest for all my network operations. It is very robust and has tons of goodies like file resuming, saving directly to disk, upload progress monitoring, download progress monitoring, and the kitchen sink. If you dont use it, you can look at the source to see how they do it because the UI never freezes when I use the progress reporting in this framework.
Although I am going to use ASIHTTPRequest for my project, it's still good to mention my solution to the problem for completeness. It is kind of obvious, but saving the core data context as frequently as every couple of seconds is a terrible mistake.
Instead, I added a progress delegate to the download operation, which gets update notification on the main thread.
NSNumber bytesDownloaded = [NSNumber numberWithLongLong:[data length]];
[downloadDelegate performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(updateProgress:) withObject:bytesDownloaded waitUntilDone:NO];
The important thing was to pass the download progress information to the delegate on the main thread. The delegate updates the progress, keeps accumulating changes and either saves when the download completes or at much bigger intervals.
Related
I was excited about the newly supported concurrent functions of CoreData since iOS 5.
A private queue is maintained and all save or fetch requests can be done via that queue.
However, can I set up the private queue for CoreData so that it executes request one by one?
My app is downloading news items from a number of feeds. Each time after downloading and parsing from one feed are finished, I just save the feed's items into CoreData via the private queue.
However, since I am downloading and parsing from multiple feeds simultaneously, I always have multiple groups of items, i.e., multiple save requests, for the CoreData.
Now the situation is that I guess CoreData just have a number of threads and each one is saving a group of items into the db. My UI got stuck in the mean time.
Do you think I can control the private queue so that no matter how many simultaneous save requests are, they will be done one by one?
Core Data is (probably) only using one serial queue or thread since its serial. I recently converted my app from using a serial queue I had created (app was 4.3) to use this new option in iOS 5. In all cases when you 'performBlock' the method is handled in a serial fashion. Also, you can now call '[moc performBlocK:...]' from any queue as that call is thread safe!
I believe what you want to do is have your background threads, which are most likely adding options, to use 'performBlock:' (without the wait). The block you provide is then queued and processed in a FIFO fashion. Later on, if your table wants to get objects, it can issue a 'performBlockAndWait:', or optionally your code can ask for the latest objects using performBlock, and at the end of the supplied block message back to your app the set of objects you need.
Also, I only ever save often in development builds, to verify validity. Once you are pretty sure things are working OK, you can then just perform a background save once all the data is downloaded.
EIDT: To reiterate - if you are downloading and also using images or other data while loading a viewController, and lots of things are going on, this is the WORST time to do a save. Use a timer or dispatch_after, and many seconds after everything seems stable THEN do the save.
I am new to objective-c/cocoa programming. I am making an application which is to constantly sync with a server and keep its view updated.
Now in a nutshell, heres what I thought of: Initiate an NSTimer to trigger every second or two, contact the server, if there is a change, update the view. Is this a good way of doing it?
I have read elsewhere that you can have a thread running in the background which monitors the changes and updates the view. I never worked with threads before and I know they can be quite troublesome and you need a good amount of experience with memory management to get most out of them.
I have one month to get this application done. What do you guys recommend? Just use an NSTimer and do it the way I though of...or learn multithreading and get it done that way (but keep in mind my time frame).
Thanks!
I think using separate thread in this case would be too much. You need to use threads when there is some task that runs for considerable amount of time and can freeze your app for some time.
In your case do this:
Create timer and call some method (say update) every N seconds.
in update send asynchronous request to server and check for any changes.
download data using NSURLConnection delegate and parse. Note: if there is probability that you can receive a huge amount of data from server and its processing can take much time (for example parsing of 2Mb of XML data) then you do need to perform that is a separate thread.
update all listeners (appropriate view controllers for example) with processed data.
continue polling using timer.
Think about requirements. The most relevant questions, IMO, are :
does your application have to get new data while running in background?
does your application need to be responsive, that is, not sluggish when it's fetching new data?
I guess the answer to the first question is probably no. If you are updating a view depending on the data, it's only required to fetch the data when the view is visible. You cannot guarantee always fetching data in background anyway, because iOS can always just kill your application. Anyway, in your application's perspective, multithreading is not relevant to this question. Because either you are updating only in foreground or also in background, your application need no more than one thread.
Multithreading is relevant rather to the second question. If your application has to remain responsive while fetching data, then you will have to run your fetching code on a detached thread. What's more important here is, the update on the user interface (like views) must happen on the main thread again.
Learning multithreading in general is something indeed, but iOS SDK provides a lot of help. Learning how to use operation queue (I guess that's the easiest to learn, but not necessarily the easiest to use) wouldn't take many days. In a month period, you can definitely finish the job.
Again, however, think clearly why you would need multithreading.
I'm working on a Core Data-based application that has a Mac application acting as a 'server' and an iPhone as a client. Everything is going swimmingly, except I'm running into performance issues.
When the user taps an object, the server must return some objects related to that object (nothing too heavy, usually 3-4 objects) and show a UI to choose some options. This needs to be as fast as possible. The round-trip time to the server, the server pulling the data, formatting it, returning it to the client, and the client creating NSManagedObjects from the data (which cannot be optimized further) is about 200 ms. The code relating to presenting the UI (which cannot be optimized further, again) requires around 150 ms. On an iPod touch 2G running iOS 4.0, the single line of code saving the managed object context after the objects are imported is taking anywhere from 150-200 ms.
To me, this screams that I should be backgrounding the managed object context saving. However, as far as I understand it, that won't really meet my needs. If I want to save the managed object context on a background thread, then all the objects in it must have been created on a background thread in a separate managed object context, so I won't see any speed gain because it will still take 100-200 ms for the save to occur, and I'll be seeing even more overhead because I'll still need to tell my main thread to update it's managed objects from the backgrounded managed object context's save before my view controller sees that it needs to refresh itself.
Am I missing an obvious solution? Is there something about Core Data I could use in this situation that would help? I hate to throw such a general question like this out there, but I'm at a complete loss where to go from here.
Sounds like you need to move the entire server communication to a background thread. If you did that then the entire UI would be responsive no matter how long the communication with the server took.
To do this, you stand up a second NSManagedObjectContext on the background thread connected to the same NSPersistentStoreCoordinator. Then you perform your server communication on that background thread (it might even make sense to use an NSOperation) and save the changes.
Your main thread and therefore main NSManagedObjectContext listens for save notifications and when it receives one it updates the main thread and UI. This will eliminate any freezing you are seeing and the processing time becomes mostly irrelevant.
So, there have been several posts here about importing and saving data from an external data source into Core Data. Apple documents a reasonable pattern for this: "import and save on background thread, merge saved objects to main thread." All fine and good.
I have a related but different problem: the user is modifying data in the UI and main thread, and thus modifies state of some objects in the managed object context (MOC). I would like to save these changes from time to time. What is a good way to do that?
Now, you could say that I could do the same: create a background thread with its own MOC and pass the changed objectID-s there. The catch-22 for me with this is that an object's ID changes when it is saved, and I cannot guarantee the order of things happening. I may end up passing a different objectID into the background thread for the same object, based on whether the object has been previously saved or not, and I don't know if Core Data can resolve this and see that different objectID-s are pointing to the same object and not create duplicates for me. (I could test this, but I'm lazywebbing with this question first.)
One thought I had: I could always do MOC saves on a background thread, and queue them up with operationqueue, so that there is always only one save in progress. I would not create a new MOC, I would just use the same MOC as in main thread. Now, this is not thread safe and when someone modifies the MOC in main thread while it is being saved in background thread, the results will probably be catastrophic. But, minus the thread safety, you can see what kind of solution I'd wish for.
To be clear, the problem I need to fix is that if I just do the save in main thread, it blocks the UI for an unacceptably long period of time, I want to move the save to background thread.
So, questions:
what about the reasoning of an object ID changing during saving, and Core Data being able to resolve them to the same object? Would this be the right way of addressing this problem?
any other good ways of doing this?
Simply put, you can't move the save to the background thread. Changes are relative to the NSManagedObjectContext and therefore are invisible to a NSManagedObjectContext on another thread.
I would suggest profiling your saves to find out why they are taking so long. Perhaps make them more frequently or find out what else might be causing the performance issue.
You are using a SQLite store right?
UPDATE
If you are using Binary it is definitely going to be an issue as I believe I mentioned to you before. Binary must be loaded 100% into memory and therefore must also be written 100% out to disk.
It may not solve all of your troubles, but there is a method -[NSManagedObjectContext obtainPermanentIDsForObjects:error:] that you can use to obtain the permanent ID for a managed object prior to saving it to the store. So that should be helpful in any synchronization you end up doing.
I'm getting some data from the web service and saving it in the core data. This workflow looks like this:
get xml feed
go over every item in that feed, create a new ManagedObject for every feed item
download some big binary data for every item and save it into ManagedObject
call [managedObjectContext save:]
Now, the problem is of course the performance - everything runs on the main thread. I'd like to re-factor as much as possible to another thread, but I'm not sure where I should start. Is it OK to put everything (1-4) to the separate thread?
Yes, I recommend reviewing both Apple's Docs on multi-threaded Core Data and my article on the MDN (Mac Developer Network) http://www.mac-developer-network.com/columns/coredata/may2009/ which discuss the things you need to avoid and how to set everything up.
BTW, saving a lot of binary data into a Core Data object is generally a bad idea. The rule goes:
< 100KB save in the entity
< 1MB save in a separate entity hanging off a relationship
1MB save to disk and store its path into the managed object
Therefore you could spin off the download of the binary data into separate threads, save them to disk and then tell the main thread the NSManagedObjectID of the referencing object and the path and let the main thread do the very quick and easy linking. That would let your Core Data implementation stay single threaded and only spin off the data downloads.