Sql – Is Core Data useful for readonly data too

Apart from the apparent difference of

• having to declare the value at the time of a definition for a const VS readonly values can be computed dynamically but need to be assigned before the constructor exits.. after that it is frozen.
• const's are implicitly static. You use a ClassName.ConstantName notation to access them.

There is a subtle difference. Consider a class defined in AssemblyA.

public class Const_V_Readonly
{
  public const int I_CONST_VALUE = 2;
  public readonly int I_RO_VALUE;
  public Const_V_Readonly()
  {
     I_RO_VALUE = 3;
  }
}

AssemblyB references AssemblyA and uses these values in code. When this is compiled:

• in the case of the const value, it is like a find-replace. The value 2 is 'baked into' the AssemblyB's IL. This means that if tomorrow I update I_CONST_VALUE to 20, AssemblyB would still have 2 till I recompile it.
• in the case of the readonly value, it is like a ref to a memory location. The value is not baked into AssemblyB's IL. This means that if the memory location is updated, AssemblyB gets the new value without recompilation. So if I_RO_VALUE is updated to 30, you only need to build AssemblyA and all clients do not need to be recompiled.

So if you are confident that the value of the constant won't change, use a const.

public const int CM_IN_A_METER = 100;

But if you have a constant that may change (e.g. w.r.t. precision).. or when in doubt, use a readonly.

public readonly float PI = 3.14;

Update: Aku needs to get a mention because he pointed this out first. Also I need to plug where I learned this: Effective C# - Bill Wagner

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:

1. 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.

2. 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.