I’m trying to build a CRUD app using SwiftData, @Query model and multidatepicker. The data from a multidatepicker is stored or persists in SwiftData as Set = []. My current dilemma is how to use SwiftData and @Query model Predicate to find all records on the current date. I can’t find any SwiftData documentation or examples @Query using Set = []. My CRUD app should retrieve all records for the current date. Unfortunately, I don’t know the correct @Query model syntax for Set = [].

SwiftData crashes 100% when fetching history of a model that contains an optional codable property that's updated: SwiftData/Schema.swift:389: Fatal error: Failed to materialize a keypath for someCodableID.someID from CrashModel. It is possible that this path traverses a type that does not work with append(), please file a bug report with a test. Would really appreciate some help or even a workaround. Code: import Foundation import SwiftData import Testing struct VaultsSwiftDataKnownIssuesTests { @Test func testCodableCrashInHistoryFetch() async throws { let container = try ModelContainer( for: CrashModel.self, configurations: .init( isStoredInMemoryOnly: true ) ) let context = ModelContext(container) try SimpleHistoryChecker.hasLocalHistoryChanges(context: context) // 1: insert a new value and save let model = CrashModel() model.someCodableID = SomeCodableID(someID: "testid1") context.insert(model) try context.save() // 2: check history it's fine. try SimpleHistoryChecker.hasLocalHistoryChanges(context: context) // 3: update the inserted value before then save model.someCodableID = SomeCodableID(someID: "testid2") try context.save() // The next check will always crash on fetchHistory with this error: /* SwiftData/Schema.swift:389: Fatal error: Failed to materialize a keypath for someCodableID.someID from CrashModel. It is possible that this path traverses a type that does not work with append(), please file a bug report with a test. */ try SimpleHistoryChecker.hasLocalHistoryChanges(context: context) } } @Model final class CrashModel { // optional codable crashes. var someCodableID: SomeCodableID? // these actually work: //var someCodableID: SomeCodableID //var someCodableID: [SomeCodableID] init() {} } public struct SomeCodableID: Codable { public let someID: String } final class SimpleHistoryChecker { static func hasLocalHistoryChanges(context: ModelContext) throws { let descriptor = HistoryDescriptor<DefaultHistoryTransaction>() let history = try context.fetchHistory(descriptor) guard let last = history.last else { return } print(last) } }

Our app saves its data to iCloud by default. In most cases, this is working as intended & the data can be synced across devices with no problems. But recently, in testing, we discovered a situation where it's possible to save data before the NSMetadataQuery finishes & starts downloading the cloud files. When this happens, the query will then finish, and return the NEW file (with no other versions or conflicts). Is there a way to ensure that writing a file (version A) to ubiquitous storage when another version (version B) exists in the cloud is treated as a conflict, rather than just stomping all over the other version? I've tried querying the file metadata for the file URL (NSURLIsUbiquitousItemKey, NSMetadataUbiquitousItemDownloadingStatusKey, NSURLUbiquitousItemDownloadRequestedKey, NSURLUbiquitousItemHasUnresolvedConflictsKey) before saving, but it just returns nil.

Hey everyone, I have a question. When creating an app, how should I design a message table that involves personal privacy? The content is stored locally on the user's device, and then encrypted in the server database? How should I design it?

Hello everyone, I am experiencing a persistent authentication error when querying a custom user profile record, and the error message seems to be a red herring. My Setup: I have a custom CKRecord type called ColaboradorProfile. When a new user signs up, I create this record and store their hashed password, salt, nickname, and a custom field called loginIdentifier (which is just their lowercase username). In the CloudKit Dashboard, I have manually added an index for loginIdentifier and set it to Queryable and Searchable. I have deployed this schema to Production. The Problem: During login, I run an async function to find the user's profile using this indexed loginIdentifier. Here is the relevant authentication code: func autenticar() async { // ... setup code (isLoading, etc.) let lowercasedUsername = username.lowercased() // My predicate ONLY filters on 'loginIdentifier' let predicate = NSPredicate(format: "loginIdentifier == %@", lowercasedUsername) let query = CKQuery(recordType: "ColaboradorProfile", predicate: predicate) // I only need these specific keys let desiredKeys = ["password", "passwordSalt", "nickname", "isAdmin", "isSubAdmin", "username"] let database = CKContainer.default().publicCloudDatabase do { // This is the line that throws the error let result = try await database.records(matching: query, desiredKeys: desiredKeys, resultsLimit: 1) // ... (rest of the password verification logic) } catch { // The error always lands here logDebug("Error authenticating with CloudKit: \(error.localizedDescription)") await MainActor.run { self.errorMessage = "Connection Error: \(error.localizedDescription)" self.isLoading = false self.showAlert = true } } } The Error: Even though my query predicate only references loginIdentifier, the catch block consistently reports this error: Error authenticating with CloudKit: Field 'createdBy' is not marked queryable. I know createdBy (the system creatorUserRecordID) is not queryable by default, but my query isn't touching that field. I already tried indexing createdBy just in case, but the error persists. It seems CloudKit cannot find or use my index for loginIdentifier and is incorrectly reporting a fallback error related to a system field. Has anyone seen this behavior? Why would CloudKit report an error about createdBy when the query is explicitly on an indexed, custom field? I'm new to Swift and I'm struggling quite a bit. Thank you,

Hi everyone, Im trying to set up CloudKit for my Unreal Engine 5.4 project but seem to be hitting some roadblocks on how to set up the Record Types. From my understanding I need to set up a "file" record type with a "contents" asset field - but even with this it doesn't seem to work :( Any unreal engine devs with some experience on this who could help me out? Thanks!

I have a CoreData model with two configuration - but several problems. Notably the viewContext only shows data from the .private configuration. Here is the setup: The private configuration holds entities, for example, User and Course and the shared one holds entities, for example, Player and League. I setup the NSPersistentStoreDescriptions to use the same container but with a databaseScope of .private/.shared and with the configuration of "Private"/"Shared". loadPersistentStores() does not report an error. If I try container.initializeCloudKitSchema() only the .private configuration produces CKRecord types. If I create a companion app using one configuration (w/ all entities) the schema initialization creates all CKRecord types AND I can populate some data in the .private and a created CKShare. I see that data in the CloudKit dashboard. If I axe the companion app and run the real thing w/ two configurations, the viewContext only has the .private data. Why? If when querying history I use NSPersistentHistoryTransaction.fetchRequest I get a nil return when using two configurations (but non-nil when using one).

Hi, I'm trying to sign in with Apple CloudKit. I'm using the following code: 'use client'; import { CLOUDKIT_CONSTANTS } from '@/constants/cloudkit'; import { setCloudKitConfigured } from '@/lib/cloudkitSingleton'; import { CloudKitStatic } from '@/types/cloudkit'; import Script from 'next/script'; declare global { interface Window { CloudKit: CloudKitStatic; } } export default function Home() { const initializeCloudKit = async () =&gt; { console.info('⭐️ initializeCloudKit - start'); // 古い認証情報を削除 try { // LocalStorageから古い認証情報を削除 const keysToRemove = []; for (let i = 0; i &lt; localStorage.length; i++) { const key = localStorage.key(i); if (key &amp;&amp; (key.includes('cloudkit') || key.includes('CloudKit'))) { keysToRemove.push(key); } } keysToRemove.forEach(key =&gt; localStorage.removeItem(key)); // SessionStorageからも削除 const sessionKeysToRemove = []; for (let i = 0; i &lt; sessionStorage.length; i++) { const key = sessionStorage.key(i); if (key &amp;&amp; (key.includes('cloudkit') || key.includes('CloudKit'))) { sessionKeysToRemove.push(key); } } sessionKeysToRemove.forEach(key =&gt; sessionStorage.removeItem(key)); console.log('古い認証情報を削除しました'); } catch (cleanupError) { console.warn('認証情報のクリーンアップ中にエラー:', cleanupError); } try { const cloudKit = window.CloudKit.configure({ containers: [ { containerIdentifier: 'XXXXXX', apiTokenAuth: { apiToken: 'XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX', persist: false, signInButton: { id: 'cloudkit-sign-in-button', theme: 'black', }, signOutButton: { id: 'cloudkit-sign-out-button', theme: 'black', }, }, environment: 'development', }, ], }); console.info('⭐️ cloudKit', cloudKit); setCloudKitConfigured(true); const container = cloudKit.getDefaultContainer(); console.info('⭐️ CloudKit configured, setting up auth...'); // 初期認証状態をチェック try { const initialUser = await container.setUpAuth(); console.info('⭐️ setUpAuth result:', initialUser); } catch (authError) { console.info('⭐️ setUpAuth error (expected for unauthenticated):', authError); } // CloudKitの標準コールバックも併用（念のため） try { container.whenUserSignsIn().then((userInfo: any) =&gt; { console.info('⭐️ CALLBACK: whenUserSignsIn fired!', userInfo); }); container.whenUserSignsOut().then(() =&gt; { console.info('⭐️ CALLBACK: whenUserSignsOut fired!'); }); } catch (callbackError) { console.info('⭐️ Callback setup error (non-critical):', callbackError); } console.info('⭐️ initializeCloudKit - completed'); } catch (error) { console.error('⭐️ Critical CloudKit initialization error:', error); } }; return ( &lt;&gt; &lt;Script src="https://cdn.apple-cloudkit.com/ck/2/cloudkit.js" strategy="afterInteractive" onLoad={() =&gt; { initializeCloudKit(); }} onError={error =&gt; { console.error('⭐️ CloudKit initialization error:', error); }} /&gt; &lt;div id="cloudkit-sign-in-button" /&gt; &lt;div id="cloudkit-sign-out-button" /&gt; &lt;/&gt; ); } In Chrome secret tab, I can sign in successfully. But in Chrome normal tab, I can't sign in. In normal tab, following error occurs on sign in button click: cloudkit.js:14 Uncaught (in promise) Error: UNKNOWN_ERROR cloudkit.js:14 GET https://api.apple-cloudkit.com/database/1/XXXXXX/XXXXXX/public/users/caller?ckjsBuildVersion=2420ProjectDev22&amp;ckjsVersion=2.6.4&amp;clientId=XXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXX-XXXXX&amp; ckAPIToken=XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX 421 (Misdirected Request) I think, cloudkit instance has re-initialized when I click the sign in button only in normal tab. So I can't sign in. Do you have any idea what might be causing the error ? Thanks in advance for your help!

We are currently implementing a custom iCloud sync for our macOS and iOS apps using CloudKit. Syncing works fine as long as the number of record sends is relatively small. But when we test with a large number of changes ( 80,000+ CKRecords ) we start running into problems. Our sending strategy is very conservative to avoid rate limits: We send records sequentially in batches of 250 records With about 2 seconds pause between operations Records are small and contain no assets (assets are uploaded separately) At some point we start receiving: “Database commit size exceeds limit” After that, CloudKit begins returning rate-limit errors with retryAfter-Information in the error. We wait for the retry time and try again, but from this moment on, nothing progresses anymore. Every subsequent attempt fails. We could not find anything in the official documentation regarding such a “commit size” limit or what triggers this failure state. So my questions are: Are there undocumented limits on the total number of records that can exist in an iCloud database (private or shared)? Is there a maximum volume of record modifications a container can accept within a certain timeframe, even if operations are split into small batches with pauses? Is it possible that sending large numbers of records in a row can temporarily or permanently “stall” a CloudKit container? Any insights or experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

I have developed an podcast app, where subscriped podcast & episodes synched with iCloud. So its working fine with iOS & iPad with latest os version, but iCloud not synching in iPod with version 15. Please help me to fix this. Thanks Devendra K.

We're in the process of migrating our app to the Swift 6 language mode. I have hit a road block that I cannot wrap my head around, and it concerns Core Data and how we work with NSManagedObject instances. Greatly simplied, our Core Data stack looks like this: class CoreDataStack { private let persistentContainer: NSPersistentContainer var viewContext: NSManagedObjectContext { persistentContainer.viewContext } } For accessing the database, we provide Controller classes such as e.g. class PersonController { private let coreDataStack: CoreDataStack func fetchPerson(byName name: String) async throws -> Person? { try await coreDataStack.viewContext.perform { let fetchRequest = NSFetchRequest<Person>() fetchRequest.predicate = NSPredicate(format: "name == %@", name) return try fetchRequest.execute().first } } } Our view controllers use such controllers to fetch objects and populate their UI with it: class MyViewController: UIViewController { private let chatController: PersonController private let ageLabel: UILabel func populateAgeLabel(name: String) { Task { let person = try? await chatController.fetchPerson(byName: name) ageLabel.text = "\(person?.age ?? 0)" } } } This works very well, and there are no concurrency problems since the managed objects are fetched from the view context and accessed only in the main thread. When turning on Swift 6 language mode, however, the compiler complains about the line calling the controller method: Non-sendable result type 'Person?' cannot be sent from nonisolated context in call to instance method 'fetchPerson(byName:)' Ok, fair enough, NSManagedObject is not Sendable. No biggie, just add @MainActor to the controller method, so it can be called from view controllers which are also main actor. However, now the compiler shows the same error at the controller method calling viewContext.perform: Non-sendable result type 'Person?' cannot be sent from nonisolated context in call to instance method 'perform(schedule:_:)' And now I'm stumped. Does this mean NSManageObject instances cannot even be returned from calls to NSManagedObjectContext.perform? Ever? Even though in this case, @MainActor matches the context's actor isolation (since it's the view context)? Of course, in this simple example the controller method could just return the age directly, and more complex scenarios could return Sendable data structures that are instantiated inside the perform closure. But is that really the only legal solution? That would mean a huge refactoring challenge for our app, since we use NSManageObject instances fetched from the view context everywhere. That's what the view context is for, right? tl;dr: is it possible to return NSManagedObject instances fetched from the view context with Swift 6 strict concurrency enabled, and if so how?

Hi all, I recently discovered that I forgot to deploy my CloudKit schema changes from development to production - an oversight that unfortunately went unnoticed for 2.5 months. As a result, any data created during that time was never synced to iCloud and remains only in the local CoreData store. Once I pushed the schema to production, CloudKit resumed syncing new changes as expected. However, this leaves me with a gap: there's now a significant amount of data that would be lost if users delete or reinstall the app. Before I attempt to implement a manual backup or migration strategy, I was wondering: Does NSPersistentCloudKitContainer keep track of local changes that couldn't be synced doe to the missing schema and automatically reattempt syncing them now that the schema is live? If not, what would be the best approach to ensure this "orphaned" data gets saved to CloudKit retroactively. Thanks in advance for any guidance or suggestions.

In core-data I have a contact and location entity. I have one-to-many relationship from contact to locations and one-to-one from location to contact. I create contact in a seperate view and save it. Later I create a location, fetch the created contact, and save it while specifying the relationship between location and contact contact and test if it actually did it and it works. viewContext.perform { do { // Set relationship using the generated accessor method currentContact.addToLocations(location) try viewContext.save() print("Saved successfully. Locations count:", currentContact.locations?.count ?? 0) if let locs = currentContact.locations { print("📍 Contact has \(locs.count) locations.") for loc in locs { print("➡️ Location: \(String(describing: (loc as AnyObject).locationName ?? "Unnamed"))") } } } catch { print("Failed to save location: \(error.localizedDescription)") } } In my NSManagedObject class properties I have this : for Contact: @NSManaged public var locations: NSSet? for Location: @NSManaged public var contact: Contact? in my persistenceController I have: for desc in [publicStore, privateStore] { desc.setOption(true as NSNumber, forKey: NSPersistentStoreRemoteChangeNotificationPostOptionKey) desc.setOption(true as NSNumber, forKey: NSPersistentHistoryTrackingKey) desc.setOption(true as NSNumber, forKey: NSMigratePersistentStoresAutomaticallyOption) desc.setOption(true as NSNumber, forKey: NSInferMappingModelAutomaticallyOption) desc.setOption(true as NSNumber, forKey: "CKSyncCoreDataDebug") // Optional: Debug sync // Add these critical options for relationship sync desc.setOption(true as NSNumber, forKey: "NSPersistentStoreCloudKitEnforceRecordExistsKey") desc.setOption(true as NSNumber, forKey: "NSPersistentStoreCloudKitMaintainReferentialIntegrityKey") // Add this specific option to force schema update desc.setOption(true as NSNumber, forKey: "NSPersistentStoreRemoteStoreUseCloudKitSchemaKey") } When synchronization happens on CloudKit side, it creates CKRecords: CD_Contact and CD_Location. However for CD_Location it creates the relationship CD_contact as a string and references the CD_Contact. This I thought should have come as REFERENCE On the CD_Contact there is no CD_locations field at all. I do see the relationships being printed on coredata side but it does not come as REFERENCE on cloudkit. Spent over a day on this. Is this normal, what am I doing wrong here? Can someone advise?

Apple's iCloud File Management documentation says to "avoid special punctuation or other special characters" in filenames, but doesn't specify which characters. I need a definitive list to implement filename sanitization in my shipping app. Confirmed issues Our iOS app (CyberTuner, App Store, 15 years shipping on App Store) manages .rcta files in the iCloud ubiquity container via NSFileManager APIs. We've confirmed two characters causing sync failures: Ampersand (&): A file named Yamaha CP70 & CP80.rcta caused repeated "couldn't be backed up" dialogs. ~12 users reported this independently. Replacing & resolved it immediately. No other files in the same directory were affected. Percent (%): A file with % in the filename was duplicated by iCloud sync (e.g., filename% 1.rcta, filename% 2.rcta), and the original was lost. Currently reproducing across multiple devices. Both characters have special meaning in URL encoding (% is the escape character, & is the query parameter separator), which suggests the issue may be in URL handling within the sync pipeline. What I'm looking for: A definitive list of characters that cause problems in the iCloud sync pipeline specifically — not APFS restrictions, but CloudDocs/FileProvider/server-side issues. Confirmation whether these characters are problematic: & % # ? + / : * " < > | Is there a system API for validating or sanitizing filenames for iCloud compatibility before writing to the ubiquity container? Our users are piano technicians who naturally name files "Steinway & Sons" — we need to know exactly what to sanitize rather than guessing. Environment: iOS 17–26, Xcode 26.1, APFS, NSFileManager ubiquity container APIs Bundle FEEDBACK ASSISTANT ID FB21900837

The NSMetadataUbiquitousItemDownloadingStatusKey indicates the status of a ubiquitous (iCloud Drive) file. A key value of NSMetadataUbiquitousItemDownloadingStatusDownloaded is defined as indicating there is a local version of this file available. The most current version will get downloaded as soon as possible . However this no longer occurs since iOS 18.4. A ubiquitous file may remain in the NSMetadataUbiquitousItemDownloadingStatusDownloaded state for an indefinite period. There is a workaround: call [NSFileManager startDownloadingUbiquitousItemAtURL: error:] however this shouldn't be necessary, and introduces delays over the previous behaviour. Has anyone else seen this behaviour? Is this a permanent change? FB17662379

Starting 20th March 2025, I see an increase in bandwidth and latency for one of my CloudKit projects. I'm using NSPersistentCloudKitContainer to synchronise my data. I haven't changed any CloudKit scheme during that time but shipped an update. Since then, I reverted some changes from that update, which could have led to changes in the sync behaviour. Is anyone else seeing any issues? I would love to file a DTS and use one of my credits for that, but unfortunately, I can't because I cannot reproduce it with a demo project because I cannot travel back in time and check if it also has an increase in metrics during that time. Maybe an Apple engineer can green-light me filing a DTS request, please.

Hi all, I am using SwiftData and cloudkit and I am having an extremely persistent bug. I am building an education section on a app that's populated with lessons via a local JSON file. I don't need this lesson data to sync to cloudkit as the lessons are static, just need them imported into swiftdata so I've tried to use the modelcontainer like this: static func createSharedModelContainer() -> ModelContainer { // --- Define Model Groups --- let localOnlyModels: [any PersistentModel.Type] = [ Lesson.self, MiniLesson.self, Quiz.self, Question.self ] let cloudKitSyncModels: [any PersistentModel.Type] = [ User.self, DailyTip.self, UserSubscription.self, UserEducationProgress.self // User progress syncs ] However, what happens is that I still get Lesson and MiniLesson record types on cloudkit and for some reason as well, whenever I update the data models or delete and reinstall the app on simulator, the lessons duplicate (what seems to happen is that a set of lessons comes from the JSON file as it should), and then 1-2 seconds later, an older set of lessons gets synced from cloudkit. I can delete the old set of lessons if I just delete the lessons and mini lessons record types, but if I update the data model again, this error reccurrs. Sorry, I don't know if I managed to explain this well but essentially I just want to stop the lessons and minilessons from being uploaded to cloudkit as I think this will fix the problem. Am I doing something wrong with the code?

My client is using iCloud Mail with his custom domain and he communicated with many govt organizations which seem to all be using Barracuda Email Protection for their spam prevention. I have properly configured his SPF, DKIM & DMARC DNS records however his emails were still being rejected. (Email header below) I contacted Barracuda support with the email header and they replied saying that the emails were rejected becuase Apple Mail has missing PTR records. I have sent dozens of emails for testing and looking at all their headers I can see (ms-asmtp-me-k8s.p00.prod.me.com [17.57.154.37]) which does not have a PTR record. ----FULL EMAIL HEADER WITH 3RD PARTY DOMAINS REMOVED----- <recipient_email_address>: host d329469a.ess.barracudanetworks.com[209.222.82.255] said: 550 permanent failure for one or more recipients (recipient_email_address:blocked) (in reply to end of DATA command) Reporting-MTA: dns; p00-icloudmta-asmtp-us-west-3a-100-percent-10.p00-icloudmta-asmtp-vip.icloud-mail-production.svc.kube.us-west-3a.k8s.cloud.apple.com X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 8979C18013F8 X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; sender_email_address Arrival-Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 12:30:05 +0000 (UTC) Final-Recipient: rfc822; @****** Original-Recipient: rfc822;recipient_email_address Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Remote-MTA: dns; d329469a.ess.barracudanetworks.com Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 permanent failure for one or more recipients (recipient_email_address:blocked) Return-Path: <sender_email_address> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sender_domain; s=sig1; bh=CyUt/U7mIHwXB5OQctPjRH/OxLH7GsLR54JjGuRkj9Y=; h=From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:To:x-icloud-hme; b=hwEbggsctiCRlMlEgovBTjB/0sPRCb2k+1wzHRZ2dZNrZdOqvFSNWU+Aki9Bl8nfv eEOoXz5qWxO2b2rEBl08lmRQ3hCyroayIn4keBRrgkxL1uu4zMTaDUHyau2vVnzC3h ZmwQtQxiu7QvTS/Sp8jjJ/niOPSzlfhphqMxnQAZi/jmJGcZPadT8K+7+PhRllVnI+ TElJarN1ORQu+CaPGhEs9/F7AIcjJNemnVg1cude7EUuO9va8ou49oFExWTLt7YSMl s+88hxxGu3GugD3eBnitzVo7s7/O9qkIbDUjk3w04/p/VOJ+35Mvi+v/zB9brpYwC1 B4dZP+AhwJDYA== Received: from smtpclient.apple (ms-asmtp-me-k8s.p00.prod.me.com [17.57.154.37]) by p00-icloudmta-asmtp-us-west-3a-100-percent-10.p00-icloudmta-asmtp-vip.icloud-mail-production.svc.kube.us-west-3a.k8s.cloud.apple.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8979C18013F8; Thu, 20 Mar 2025 12:30:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Marcel Brunel <sender_email_address> Message-Id: <2E8D69EA-FCA6-4F5D-9D42-22A955C073F6@sender_domain> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F9AC7D29-8520-4B25-9362-950CB20ADEC5" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 (3826.400.131.1.6)) Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: Brunel - 2024 taxes Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 07:29:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: <SA0PR18MB350300DE7274C018F66EEA24F2D82@SA0PR18MB3503_namprd18_prod_outlook_com> To: Troy Womack <recipient_email_address> References: <SA0PR18MB350314D0B88E283C5C8E1BB6F2DE2@SA0PR18MB3503_namprd18_prod_outlook_com> <9B337A3E-D373-48C5-816F-C1884BDA6F42@sender_domain> <SA0PR18MB350341A7172E8632D018A910F2D82@SA0PR18MB3503_namprd18_prod_outlook_com> <SA0PR18MB350300DE7274C018F66EEA24F2D82@SA0PR18MB3503_namprd18_prod_outlook_com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3826.400.131.1.6) X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: uqebp2OIbPqBr3dYsAxdFVkCNbM5Cxyl X-Proofpoint-GUID: uqebp2OIbPqBr3dYsAxdFVkCNbM5Cxyl X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1093,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.68.34 definitions=2025-03-20_03,2025-03-19_01,2024-11-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1030 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2411120000 definitions=main-2503200077

Hello, I am building a pretty large database (~40MB) to be used in my SwiftData iOS app as read-only. While inserting and updating the data, I noticed a substantial increase in size (+ ~10MB). A little digging pointed to ACHANGE and ATRANSACTION tables that apparently are dealing with Persistent History Tracking. While I do appreciate the benefits of that, I prefer to save space. Could you please point me in the right direction?

I'm trying to use the new (in tvOS 26) video streaming service automatic login API from the VideoSubscriberAccount framework: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/videosubscriberaccount/vsuseraccountmanager/autosignintoken-swift.property It seems that this API requires an entitlement. This document suggests that the com.apple.smoot.subscriptionservice entitlement is required. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/videosubscriberaccount/signing-people-in-to-media-apps-automatically However, it seems more likely that com.apple.developer.video-subscriber-single-sign-on is the correct entitlement. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/entitlements/com.apple.developer.video-subscriber-single-sign-on Which is the correct entitlement and how do I obtain it? I don't want to fully comply with the video partner program. https://developer.apple.com/programs/video-partner/ I just want to use this one new automatic login feature.