How do I decide which of my application's files go in Program Files (FOLDERID_ProgramFilesX64) and which go in ProgramData? (FOLDERID_ProgramData)? I don't understand what the reason is for splitting up my application's fixed files into these two categories or how I should decide which file goes in what.
For example - image files which my application displays, are they "program" or "data"?
Is there any problem with just putting everything under one or the other?
The application is installed for All Users and has no user-specific configuration files or data.
Program Files is for executables and other static files that came as part of the installation. ProgramData is for user-agnostic data generated during execution such as shared cache, shared databases, shared settings, shared preferences, etc. User-specific data goes in the AppData folder. Note that these are for non-user-visible data. User-visible data belongs in the documents folder (or music, video, custom sibling folder, etc.).
Please see Special Folders and Custom Folders for a detailed explanation. Note that the terminology used varies slightly between the name used in the documentation here, the name of the folder, and the name used by various enumerations used to get these paths from the system.
Related
I’m designing a custom file format. It will be either a monolith file or a folder with smaller files. It’s a rather large file in total and there is no need to load everything into memory at once. It would make it also slower than necessary. One of the file(s) may or may not be database file. Running SQL queries would be useful.
The user can have many such files. The user might want to share files with others even if it takes some time to up/download it.
Conceptually I run into issues with shared network folders, Dropbox, iCloud, etc. Such services can lead to sync issues if the file is not loaded entirely in memory or the database file can get corrupted.
One solution is to prohibit storing the file on such services. Either by using a user/library folder or forcing the user to pick a local folder.
Using a folder in library means recreating a file navigation system like Finder. It limits the choice of the user as well in where the files end up. Limiting the location to a local folder seems the better choice.
Is there a way to programmatically detect if a folder is local?
I'm creating a macOS FileProviderExtension for the remote Document Storage System (kind of like GoogleDrive), where it is possible to share a single document with multiple folders.
For example, Document1.pdf can simultaneously exist in Folder A and Folder B because it's shared with both folders. In my FileProvider extension, this would mean that file should be accessible in both folders:
Folder A/Document1.pdf
Folder B/Document1.pdf
But the file provider extension will treat those as two completely separate files. I.e., if you download one of them, and then try to open the other one, it will redownload the other one, effectively doubling the used space on user's disk and consuming network connection.
I'm looking for a way to tell the FileProviderItem what is the backing data for the given file, and thus solve problems such as:
If user downloads a file in one location, ideally I would tell the FileProvider extension that the same document in all the other locations is also now downloaded (cloud icon should disappear from all files).
Some approaches I considered:
I thought of using symbolic links as part of solution, but I don't really think that's possible
When user tries to open non-downloaded file, fetchContents(for itemIdentifier) callback is invoked. Once file is downloaded, I would ideally now notify all the other files of the same document that they are downloaded, i.e. by updating the isDownloaded property in NSFileProviderItem, but that doesn't seem to work. Also, even if I do that, I still can't say to file, what his backing data file should be.
By turning off the Sandbox capability, I guess I could, when user tries to download/open the file which has already been downloaded in other location, immediately report that file has been downloaded and provide the copy of already downloaded file as data for the requested file, but there are two drawbacks here:
3.1. I would have to turn off the Sandbox capability because I want to access the file in FileProvider path directly
3.2 System would still use disk space for each file. So, if I have same document in multiple folders, extension would keep all those copies in the system, without the option to tell it that for all those files, there is same backing data file somewhere in extension's Container.
I found all of these answers to a question I had:
Store pictures as files or in the database for a web app?
Storing images in SQL Server?
To Do or Not to Do: Store Images in a Database
And the last one links to even more versions of the same question. They typically have the same answer, suggesting to use a file system, then store the address in a data base. When they say "file system", do they mean store it in the folders that you use to make the website?
The way I've been learning to make websites, there's the "views" folder that has all the layouts, then there's the "public" folder that stores your css and js files. Then I have a line of code in the app so I don't have to type public all the time when I'm linking to my css files or js files. So would I store the images in there? With it's own folder and maybe a folder for each user? What happens when there's a lot of users and a lot of pictures?
Or should the pictures go somewhere else entirely?
I've done my best to find the answer on my own, but "file system" is such a generic term, I can't find the specific answer.
Yes, filesystem means to put them as files alongside the files that your website consists of.
Generally, there are a couple good practices to follow when doing so:
Put them in some folder that's dedicated to user data, not to the same folder you put your website's core files
Generate artificial file names (UUIDs or database-generated IDs) for them instead of using the original file names to avoid name collisions
If you expect a lot of files, on some filesystems it may be a good practice to create a level of subdirectories to limit number of items in each directory
It might be a good idea (depending on your use case) to forbid direct access to this folder with user data through plain HTML
Instead read the files and output them through your script
This is required if the files are not all public (if any authorization is needed to see them)
My application stores logs in /Users/username/Library/Logs/appname and preferences in /Users/username/Library/Preferences/appname but where I should store the reports it creates.
Originally they were in Logs, but they are not really logs. I then thought about putting them in /Users/username/Library/Reports/appname but the Reports folder does not exist under Library and it seems bad practise to create additional folders at this level.
What is the correct mac-friendly way to do things ?
A good candidate would be your app's folder in ~/Library/Application Support/
You may need to create it, and you should really use the bundle identifier for your app as the folder name.
~/Library/Application Support/com.bundleIdentifier.something/
In there you can create whatever you need to to support your app.
File System Programming Guide
Important: The files in the user’s Documents and Desktop directories
should reflect only the documents that the user created and works with
directly. Similarly, the media directories should contain only the
user’s media files. Those directories must never be used to store data
files that your app creates and manages automatically. If you need a
place to store automatically generated files, use the Library
directory, which is designated specifically for that purpose. For
information on where to put files in the Library directory, see “The
Library Directory Stores App-Specific Files.”
Application Support Use this directory to store all app data files except those associated with the user’s documents. For example, you
might use this directory to store app-created data files,
configuration files, templates, or other fixed or modifiable resources
that are managed by the app. An app might use this directory to store
a modifiable copy of resources contained initially in the app’s
bundle. A game might use this directory to store new levels purchased
by the user and downloaded from a server. All content in this
directory should be placed in a custom subdirectory whose name is that
of your app’s bundle identifier or your company. In iOS, the contents
of this directory are backed up by iTunes.
As far as I figured, those are reports that are the end result of the app itself and are something the user needs to have access to.
Even more so, the reports are HTML (so a valid recognizable format)?
I think that constitutes them as documents.
I would put a folder in documents named after the app and put the reports there.
A lot of apps do that (Office comes to mind at the moment).
We are migrating our APP to Win7. The program generates log files to help us support and also saves a number of dictionary files and settings files that are useful for the user though the user will rarely if ever actually want to interact with the files outside of our application. They can though because they are csv files. I built the first run through with using the APPDATA\LOCAL\OURAPPLICATION folder as the destination. Now I am wondering if it should be PROGRAMDATA\OURAPPLICATION.
I actually think the first choice is better because it seems that everything I have scanned suggests that the PROGRAMDATA folder should be considered untouchable by the user but as I am not a programmer I am not sure.
I hope this is the right place to ask this question
The key point to consider is what the scope of the data is. If you are storing data that is associated with a specific user then you should use APPDATA and if you are storing data that is global to your program then you should use PROGRAMDATA.
Both APPDATA and PROGRAMDATA are hidden folders so the intent is for users not to be poking around in there (not that they couldn't if they wanted to).