I'm trying to store a set of strings using the SharedPreferences
API.
Set<String> s = sharedPrefs.getStringSet("key", new HashSet<String>());
s.add(new_element);
SharedPreferences.Editor editor = sharedPrefs.edit();
editor.putString(s);
edit.commit()
The first time I execute the code above, s
is set to the default value (the just created end empty HashSet
) and it is stored without problems.
The second and next times I execute this code, a s
object is returned with the first element added. I can add the element, and during the program execution, it is apparently stored in the SharedPreferences
, but when the program is killed, the SharedPreferences
read again from its persistent storage and the newer values are lost.
How can the second, and elements after that, be stored so they won't get lost?
This "problem" is documented on
SharedPreferences.getStringSet
.The
SharedPreferences.getStringSet
returns a reference of the stored HashSet object inside theSharedPreferences
. When you add elements to this object, they are added in fact inside theSharedPreferences
.That is ok, but the problem comes when you try to store it: Android compares the modified HashSet that you are trying to save using
SharedPreferences.Editor.putStringSet
with the current one stored on theSharedPreference
, and both are the same object!!!A possible solution is to make a copy of the
Set<String>
returned by theSharedPreferences
object:That makes
s
a different object, and the strings added tos
will not be added to the set stored inside theSharedPreferences
.Other workaround that will work is to use the same
SharedPreferences.Editor
transaction to store another simpler preference (like an integer or boolean), the only thing you need is to force that the stored value are different on each transaction (for example, you could store the string set size).This behaviour is documented so it is by design:
from getStringSet:
And it seems quite reasonable especially if it is documented in the API, otherwise this API would have to make copy on each access. So the reason for this design was probably performance. I suppose they should make this function return result wrapped in unmodifiable class instance, but this once again requires allocation.
Was searching for a solution for the same issue, resolved it by:
1) Retrieve the existing set from the shared preferences
2) Make a copy of it
3) Update the copy
4) Save the copy
Why
I tried all the above answers none worked for me. So I did the following steps
add the values present in copy to the cleared shared preference it will treat it as new.
I was facing issue with the values not being persistent, if i reopen the app after cleaning the app from background only first element added to the list was shown.