Suppose that an Android app has multiple entry points: activities, services started by the system, etc.
And suppose we need to perform some tasks when the app (meaning any component of it) is starting with any of the above options. To put it in some context, suppose we need to initialize crash reporting system.
Putting code at every antry point (Activity.onCreate(), Service..onCreate()) is the first thing that comes into mind, but it looks like there should be a better approach.
What is the practice to implement it?
The usual approach is to place that code in Application.onCreate() which is
called when the application is starting, before any activity, service, or receiver objects (excluding content providers) have been created. This is how many libraries like Fabric/Crashlytics are initialized.
Related
My app needs to initially download data from two different web services (JSON) and import them into it's local database (Realm). I have two activities that need to display data from these web services. The first one (HomeActivity) is the initial activity that the app loads. The second one (LineupActivity) is created when navigating to it from the HomeActivity.
Currently, I've created an Application class (extending Application) in order to handle the web service downloading and importing. In it's onCreate(), it calls two methods, which are AsyncTasks that download and import each web service.
The reason I've added this download/import process into the Application class is for 2 reasons:
I want all the app data to be downloaded as soon as possible, so
when navigating to the second activity it doesn't need to initiate
another download.
Both these activities have swipe to refresh. They call each respective method in the Application class to re-download/import the
web service data.
Have I approached this incorrectly? Should I move the web service download/import logic out of the Application class? Also, does the onCreate() of the Application class get called more than once? Meaning, I know that it only gets called only once in the application's lifecycle, but does the Android OS eventually kill an app and have it call the onCreate() in the Application class when starting it again? I want the app to download fresh data upon startup, but not every time the user brings the app into focus.
Have I approached this incorrectly?
"Incorrectly" is a very relative term in this context.
Metaphorically, its like the context is never null but that doesn't determine boolean incorrect is true or false.
Should I move the web service download/import logic out of the Application class?
I would say Yes, as the download logic would not be related to the O.S. and the app being alive in its memory. Your requirement does not seem complex. Service would be necessary if the downloads are huge chunks of data, and if its not necessary, don't do it.
Also, does the onCreate() of the Application class get called more than once? Meaning, I know that it only gets called only once in the application's lifecycle...Application class when starting it again?
No, it won't be called more than once without app being killed and restarted. And what your are saying is correct, but for your requirement, there are probably more efficient and lighter ways to do it rather than combining it with an Application class.
For the rest of the logic, you could implement Asynctasks as a separate class and implement interfaces which are the callbacks of the result of your task. This would help in Swipe-to-refresh functionality.
In terms of documentation reference, Application class
There is normally no need to subclass Application. In most situation,
static singletons can provide the same functionality in a more modular
way.
Your case seems exactly that.
One thing you need to decide is When, how often do you need to refresh/download the data. For only start-up of the app or once daily, you can store date/day in SharedPreferences and check the value in onResume() of your Activity.
You can also implement inheritance with a Base Activity with the necessary download check logic in it and extend your classes. A Splash Screen would always help to initiate the downloads.
I suppose you could approach this anyway you want, though I like to implement one of the three options mentioned here: https://dl.google.com/googleio/2010/android-developing-RESTful-android-apps.pdf.
The presentation itself can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHXn3Kg2IQE.
This does however not mention how you should sync on startup. But you could just set a SharedPreference in the application class and then use one of the patterns to sync in the background.
I'd recommend you instead of using Application to download your stuff to use a Service. If by any reason your app gets killed by the OS your dl's will never complete. Using a Service it will.
Also, you can use a Broadcast to your activity to signalize that the service has completed downloading and taking the necessary following steps.
first: I think it's bad to place the download at appliaction onCreate
as stated in documentation
Called when the application is starting, before any activity, service,
or receiver objects (excluding content providers) have been created.
Implementations should be as quick as possible (for example using lazy
initialization of state) since the time spent in this function
directly impacts the performance of starting the first activity,
service, or receiver in a process. If you override this method, be
sure to call super.onCreate().
pay attention to this part
Implementations should be as quick as possible (for example using lazy initialization of state) since the time spent in this function directly impacts the performance of starting the first activity
so any delay in download or import may cause the first activity to be delayed.
and the behavior is not clear, a black screen maybe?
Second suggestions for download/import:
1- use an AsyncTask in the first activity, where you display a small progress bar indicating the download/import process or even block the whole UI until completed (based on your business)
2- add a splash screen while downloading the data
regarding fresh data, you can store a timestamp, last_updated
and before starting the download/import process, check that value, if less than your accepted value (say 1 hour) don't start the download/import.
finally, regarding onCreate() call, i think it's not called everytime, only when app is re-created, like 1st run after reboot, or after being killed or forced close.
I am working on a solution or code that can be embedded inside of an Android APK to track how many times the app has been launched and how long the app has ran for. I know one way to do this is using the ActivityLifecycleMethods in API 14 and in lower versions of Android having code placed in all Activity Lifecycle events or by providing a base Activity class.
1) Is there a way to hook the ActivityLifecycleMethods without the developer having to make any changes to their code outside of dropping additional code into their App?
I believe this answer is no because even with an Enum Singleton it is not loaded until it is referenced. Also the Enum Singleton will go away once the activity is changed since a different class loader is used when activities change.
If I wanted to keep the Enum Singleton around would it be possible to store a reference to the applicationContext and thus it wouldn't be removed when the Activity changes? Is that what google means by
"There is normally no need to subclass Application. In most situation, static singletons can provide the same functionality in a more modular way. If your singleton needs a global context (for example to register broadcast receivers), the function to retrieve it can be given a Context which internally uses Context.getApplicationContext() when first constructing the singleton." on http://developer.android.com/reference/android/app/Application.html
2) I am not a fan of this solution for older API versions. It seems very likely developers could forget to modify their Activity Lifecycle methods or forget to inherit from the created BaseActivity. Are there any other unique solutions for these older platforms? Is there any other approaches that can be done to determine when an activity isn't running? Could any of the following work:
a) User a class loader to ensure the base activity with the proper metrics are always used
b) Implement some type of heart beat. Will a timer stop working if the app is paused or killed? Is there some other way? Could the ActivityManager be used?
You have many Analytic Agents like Flurry to do that.
When ever you want to track an event, you will add it to flurry and inturn it syncs with server after specific time.
You may use the same logic.
Better create a library file with following features:
Start Application
End Application and report time to db.
Track a specific event count and update to db.
Sync the data to server you like to.
Call appropriate events from your app.
An application background service updates sqlite database. Therefore my activities are becoming outdated. Activity intents also contain outdated params so onCreate, onResume will crash the application. An easiest solution is to restart whole application. I don't want to add IFs to all onCreate, onResume methods in all activities to handle one special case.
I noticed that ACRA has following code executed after an exception has been handled.
android.os.Process.killProcess(android.os.Process.myPid());
System.exit(10);
However many people discourage use of System.exit(0). Is System.exit(0) really that dangerous for an Android application data integrity? Of course my code will close the database before existing.
Update:
I known how to use finish(), content providers, send broadcasts, read many answers here on SO, etc. However each of these approaches requires additional thousands lines of code. I implemented solution with System.exit(0) in ten minutes. The restart is so fast that it is indistinguishable from ordinary startActivity action. The db update/restart is done after longer user inactivity so the app is already suspended by the system. My app doesn't require real time syncing. During tests the application behaves correctly. This is quick and dirty solution.
Therefore I asked the question about possible side effects of System.exit(0). Not how I can do the design differently. I know that current design is not perfect.
System.exit(0) is an artifact from Java runtime, it isn't meant for Android. So in any cases using it would be worst solution.
Why don't you use Activity.finish() gracefully?
If you terminate the process you are living in, you'll loose most of the caching and restart time (~resume in the eyes of the user) for it next time will be higher.
Read more in Activity Lifecycle documentation on Android Developers.
Killing the process will not clean up any registered resources from outside the process. BroadcastReceivers, for example. This is a leak and the device will tell you as much.
You really shouldn't be updating the database schema from a background service. Do it when your activities resume.
If you are just updating your data, resuming an activity should validate the data specified by the Intent and tell the user if, for example, Item X is no longer there.
No tool is that dangerous if used carefully and for a specific, well thought off purpose.
However, In your case I do not believe System.exit() is the right way to go. If your application depends on data from a database, create a background service (or a few, depending on what you need) that will inform your application of changes and update the data. It is, in my opinion the right way to handle changes.
As for scenarios when you want to use System.exit() I personally sometimes use it when I can't recover from a critical error and no graceful degradation is possible. In those cases it is better to force all resources associated with your application to cease rather than just leave loose ends tangling around. To clarify, you should always use error handling before doing anything radical. Proper error handling is often the way to go.
But this is a very delicate topic and you are likely to receive quite a few diverging answers.
Therefore my activities are becoming outdated.
Use a ContentProvider and ContentObserver (or the Loader framework), or use a message bus (LocalBroadcastManager, Otto, etc.) to update the activities in situ.
Activity intents also contain outdated params so onCreate, onResume will crash the application
Copy the relevant "params" to data members of the activities. Update those data members as needed (e.g., from the handlers from the message bus-raised events). Hold onto that data as part of your instance state for configuration change (e.g., onSaveInstanceState()). Use this data from onCreate(), onResume(), etc.
An easiest solution is to restart whole application
It is not easiest, if you value your users, as your users will not appreciate your app spontaneously evaporating while they are using it. Do you think that Gmail crashes their own app every time an email comes in?
Next, you will propose writing a Web app that uses some exploit to crash the browser, because you cannot figure out how to update a Web page.
I noticed that ACRA has following code executed after an exception has been handled.
A top-level exception handler is about the only sensible place to have this sort of code, and even there, the objective is for this code to never run (i.e., do not have an unhandled exception).
There's an existing answer HERE that might give you some help as to why people say it's bad to use System.Exit().
My Application has an Activity for the UI and a Service for background polling fun. Seems like standard fare.
Can AlarmManager trigger the Service Intent without Activity OnCreate being called?
Is there any benefit to putting the Activity & Service into different Applications? Would this create 2 apk's and make it impossible to put into Market as one app? Can you put 2 applications into one manifest somehow?
Regarding communication between the two:
-If Activity & Service are part of the same Application - can't I just store common objects (like User object) at the Application scope for the 2 to share?
-It seems like I don't even need to bother with AIDL - the two could just have weak references to each other at the Application scope as well - and they can call methods on each other that way? Or should they pub/sub each other with some kind of Observer Pattern or BroadcastListener thing?
Can AlarmManager trigger the Service Intent without Activity OnCreate being called?
Yes.
Is there any benefit to putting the Activity & Service into different Applications?
IMHO, no.
Would this create 2 apk's and make it impossible to put into Market as one app?
Yes.
Can you put 2 applications into one manifest somehow?
From a pure XML standpoint, there is room in the manifest for more than one <application> element. However, AFAIK, only one is supported.
If Activity & Service are part of the same Application - can't I just store common objects (like User object) at the Application scope for the 2 to share?
For very quick things, yes. However, bear in mind that your service may get shut down (by Android, by user, etc.), after which your process may get terminated, and your Application object goes poof. I'd use this for light caching only.
It seems like I don't even need to bother with AIDL
Correct -- that is only needed for inter-process service binding.
the two could just have weak references to each other at the Application scope as well
I wouldn't do that in a million years. Please use the platform responsibly. There are plenty of ways for activities and services to communicate yet remain loosely coupled (or, in the case of the local binding pattern, tightly-coupled in an Android-aware fashion).
Or should they pub/sub each other with some kind of Observer Pattern or BroadcastListener thing?
Something along those lines would be preferable. While the activity and the service may be co-resident in the same process at the same time, they are not designed to be directly linked to one another.
In my Android application, I overload the Application class, and I updated the tag in my manifest. This application also creates an Android Service.
I have put some logs in the onCreate of my Application class, and I see it being called twice.
The first time is when my application gets launched (this is expected) and then, it's usually right after the Service is being created.
the log also shows that a second instance of the Application is being created.
(I print the "this" value and they are different).
I thought the Application would be created as a singleton.
Is that happening because I create a Service?
Yes, if you used android:process then you have it running in a separate process, so when the service starts a new process is started for it and thus a new Application object for that process needs to be created.
But there is a more fundamental problem - it is just not right for an Application object to start one of its services. It is important that you don't confuse Application with how you may think of an "application" in another OS. The Application object does not drive the app. It is just a global of state for the app in that process. In fact, the Application object is completely superfluous -- you never need one to write an Android application. Generally I actually recommend that people don't use it. It is more likely to cause trouble than anything else.
Another way to put this: what really defines an application is its collection of activity, service, receiver, and provider tags. Those are what are "launched." All an Application is, is something that is created as part of initializing an application's process. It has no lifecycle of its own, it is just there to serve the other real components in the app.
So just ignore Application when designing your app; it will reduce confusion. (In its place, I prefer to use global singletons for such state.)
Also as a general rule, I recommend not using android:process. There are certainly some uses for it, but the vast majority of the time it is not needed and just makes an application use more RAM, less efficient, and harder to write (since you can't take advantage of globals in a single process). It should be obvious to you if you reach a place where there is actually a good reason to use android:process.
A Service should not really be thought of as an Activity, and you're bound to have problems later on if you think this way. Services and Activities can belong to the same application, if you defined them that way in your AndroidManifest.xml, but they behave differently and have different lifecycles. If you want your Service in a different process, then you set android:process="string" in the <service> section to give it a name different from your application name. You won't have access to global variables when it's in a separate process, and you should communicate to your service through Intents. If your service is more complex, you might want to look at making it remotely callable through AIDL. If you want a singleton activity, then set that Activity's launchMode to either singleInstance or singleTask. singleInstance means it will be the first and only instance of this Activity in it's task stack and no new instances will be created for any new Intents. Since it's the only instance of this Activity, it will always be at the top of the task stack, and always in a position to handle new Intents directed at this Activity. If the Activity is declared as singleTask it will also be a singleton but may have other Activities in the same task stack, and may even have Activities at the top of the task stack above it. This is an important distinction to note. Remember this: singleton Activities that are NOT at the top of the task stack cannot handle new Intents, and the Intent will be dropped. If you want your Activity to always be able to handle all new Intents destined for it, then you most likely want to use singleInstance
The problem is that a Service is a component too, with its own lifecycle, just it hasn't got an user interface.
You should check the developer application fundamentals for the alternatives.
I just had this issue and after reading all this, nothing helped. Here is what helped me.
Add the attribute MainLauncher = true to your MainActivity.cs class.