This caused problems when users then tried to action the pending
install, where it would no longer have enough information to install the
app. Although it may be technically possible to keep enough information
around in memory to make the app installable, but it is not worth the
effort. If a user intentionally disables a repo, we should no longer be
responsible for keeping information about its apps around.
Fixes#995.
There are some ACRA reports with this IllegalStateException getting hit.
It used to be that it was only ever because we forgot to request the
correct fields from the database. However now I'm not sure that this is
the only source. Perhaps it is also possible in response to parcelling
apk instances, or maybe something else? Either way, this should provide
further info about whether the apk doesn't belong to a repo for some
reason.
There are two methods which allow callers to choose which fields to
return. These were originally added for performance, so you only ask for
what you need. However empirically the performance gain doesn't mean
anything, because it is dwarfed by the query that was just executed.
However, it does open the code up to bugs because we forget to ask for
the right fields. So now it just returns all fields when querying for
apks.
While investigating #1086 which was about swap being busted, I
discovered that we recently introduced a worse bug when working with
multi sig stuff. The swap process, when installing an app (or even when
listening for if a user started installing - before they even did
anything), would ask for an apk from any repo. This is wrong, because we
should only ask for the apks from the swap repo when presented with a
swap dialog.
By fixing this so that it asks for a specific apk, this may also
fix the issue in #1086, because that was about us not asking for enough
info from the database for each Apk which was returned. Now we just
return all columns, because the performance overhead should be minimal,
but it prevents this class of bugs, where we didn't fully populate
our value object. However, I'm not confident that it is fixed, because I
was unable to reproduce it due to the other crash fixed in this change.
Relevant crash:
```
java.lang.NullPointerException: Attempt to invoke virtual method 'java.lang.String org.fdroid.fdroid.data.Apk.getUrl()' on a null object reference
at org.fdroid.fdroid.views.swap.SwapAppsView$AppListAdapter$ViewHolder.setApp(SwapAppsView.java:311)
at org.fdroid.fdroid.views.swap.SwapAppsView$AppListAdapter.bindView(SwapAppsView.java:422)
at org.fdroid.fdroid.views.swap.SwapAppsView$AppListAdapter.newView(SwapAppsView.java:414)
at android.support.v4.widget.CursorAdapter.getView(CursorAdapter.java:269)
at android.widget.AbsListView.obtainView(AbsListView.java:2349)
at android.widget.ListView.makeAndAddView(ListView.java:1864)
at android.widget.ListView.fillDown(ListView.java:698)
...
```
Each app insert required asking the database for the ID of each
category an app is in. Given the categories don't change (ever)
but are only appended to, we can cache the results in a static
Java variable for increased performance.
This reduced the "repo persister" logic for me from 50 seconds
for main F-Droid and 100 seconds for Archive, down to 15 seconds
and 30 seconds respectively.
Now that we need only "insert" new apps rather than"
* Identify if an app exists
* If so, update
* If not, insert
There is much less code required for all of this stuff.
When preparing a temp database to write to, don't copy all apps/apks.
Instead, only copy those _not_ belonging to the repo we are updating.
In an ideal world, we'd not even need to copy them, but we need
their IDs to be in the temp database so that we don't accidentally
use the same auto-generated ID as the main database.
This also means that we can drop the check for "does this app exist,
and hence should we UPDATE it instead of INSERTing it?" and always
just insert it.
Then, when copying the temp table back to disk, first delete all
apps/apks _belonging to the repo being updated_. Then, copy back the
apks/apps we found in the repo. This again improves performance because
we no longer need to bopy back and forth data which we know
wont change (as evidenced by the fact it belongs to a differen trepo).
I don't think this was possible earlier before we did the work to
support repo priorities properly. That is because we had a single app
which was serviced by several repositories. Now, we have multiple
entries in the `fdroid_app` table, for each repo which supports
that app.
