offloading

If there is a way to achieve, then How can I upload/download data after 30 minutes of app went backgrond?.Two things:iOS provides no general mechanism for an app to schedule itself to be resumed at a specific time.If an app is running, it has full access to the network, regardless of whether it’s in the foreground or background. The only gotcha is that devices with WWAN will typically shut down Wi-Fi when the device is locked.I’m confused about your upload requirement. If you’re suspended in the background there should be no need to upload data because you can’t possibly have generated new data that warrants uploading.As far as downloads are concerned, my standard recommendation in this space is to have your app offload the decision about what data needs to be dowloaded to a server. When the server decides that the app needs some data it can send it a silent push notification to the app, in response to which the app can kick off the download.IMPORTANT You can use silent push notifications as a mechan

Let's be plain about it: UIKit (which basically cover all of the UI Thread territory) isn't thread safe and the things that draw the view hierarchy run on the main thread. The rare exceptions are outstanding enough that they get mentioned explicitly in the documentation as being thread safe or being designed to run in another thread/queue.On the other hand, it really depends on what you're doing and what sorts of latency you're allowing for how much you can offload to another thread. Because the straight forward way of offloading things that were originally done on the main thread to a background thread ends up looking a lot like this: You've got an action method that's responding to the user tapping a button. Gather up all of the relevant parameters and dispatch a block to the worker queue.Inside that worker block, do the computation and work. Gather up the relevant results and dispatch a block to the main queue. Inside this second block, use the passed in results to update the user interfa

I understand that UIKit is not designed to be thread safe, and that generally long running tasks need to be offloaded to other threads to avoid blocking the main thread.I'm just currently making UIKit do a lot of work - animations, autolayout etc. Which cannot be offloaded to another thread - therefore being a prime candidate for the creation of another UI thread and everything that goes along with that.So what I want is sounding to be unlikely.I want to be able to duplicate my application into another window and have the second window not interfere with performance of the main window.Without significant rewriting effort.Another UI thread working on the separate window would solve my problem immediately and gracefully.I do appreciate all of the comments though.So, thank you.

From what I have been reading, APFS changes how Fusion works. It's now just a cache repository for meta data, readback cache and writeback cache. It will assist in directory listing. App Nap, Prelinking and directory lookups would likely be the most impacted.I do not know if it will offload files to the SSD that are frequently used like in days past. I'm not saying this is fact but supposition based on what little information I've found so far. The nature of APFS means it is always optimizing content in order to reduce fragmentation so logically it makes sense that it would work off of the HDD and use the Fusion as a cache - such as that for app nap. Anyone else have insight on APFS and Fusion topology? Has it changed Fusion fundamentally?

Have you checked to see if your Offload Unused Apps is enabled? Is it possible that these are apps that you have not used in a while and the new OS has removed them from your device due to inactivity in order to free up space on your phone?

You're right Scott. Offload unused apps somehow was enabled. It did an awful job of determining inactivity. For example it removed 1Password which I use seveeral times a day. It also blew apart most folders and couldn't bring apps back as advertised.Thanks,Tom

Same here. What worked for me was deleting the ‘prepared’ install bits, from the iPhone Storage settings after the install failed a couple of times, then re-downloading. The subsequent attempt to download completed, “prepared”, and “verified”, and successfully updated the phone (iPhone 7). [For the curious, I have a 128GB iPhone 7, which has about 60GB free. Ample space for the OS to download the update bits, expand them, and do what it needed to do to effect an install without offloading apps or other data to introduce confounding variables to the process.]

Hi again,Thanks for the reply. This makes me aware of a number of risks we did not appreciate.Could I just follow up to be sure I understand them right? Specifically, even after we‘ve switched to CA-signed server certificates, you point out two major reasons we should still avoid performing our own server trust challenge evaluation (or indeed handling any authentication challenge) with background sessions:The first reason is we might be penalized by the iOS resume rate limiter:For background sessions specifically, the resumes necessary to handle this authentication challenge counter against the resume rate limiter.Note This applies to all authentication challenges, not just server trust challenges.My question is, is this an issue even if I'm doing something computationally cheap like checking the certificate's common name? In other words, do you mean that any URLSessionDelegate object which implements urlSession(_ session: didReceive: completionHandler:) is a handicap for background execution, because simply