Hello, the last days I was trying to solve a bug in my Unit Tests related to the CoreData "NSManagedObjectContextObjectsDidChange" Notification. Im using some kind of Notification handler to save and abstract that for the UI and while the tests are running this notification was triggered with objects that doesn't exists anymore, which has resulted in a crash. After some debugging I have detected, that the objects in here are really old. The objects here was from few tests ago, where a Merge Conflict happened. In the meantime there was a plenty of resets and deletes of the whole db. I have also seen that the bad notification is the first in the stack trace of the main thread, which is in my opinion also not usual. So the real question is: The only difference what I have found for the bad notification to the real notification, was the existence of the key "NSObjectsChangedByMergeChangesKey" in the UserInfo dictionary of the ObjectsDidChange Notification. But this key is nowhere found in the documentation of Apple. Also the search engines does not produce any result. So what is this key and when is this key contained in this notification and when not? Maybe if I understand this, it helps me to understand the overall issue ...

Since running on iOS 14b1, I'm getting this in my log (I have Core Data logging enabled): error: Store opened without NSPersistentHistoryTrackingKey but previously had been opened with NSPersistentHistoryTrackingKey - Forcing into Read Only mode store at 'file:///private/var/mobile/Containers/Shared/AppGroup/415B75A6-92C3-45FE-BE13-7D48D35909AF/StoreFile.sqlite' As far as I can tell, it's impossible to open my store without that key set - it's in the init() of my NSPersistentContainer subclass, before anyone calls it to load stores. Any ideas?

I'm looking for guidance how to mitigate this crash. It seems super deep inside Core Data' FRC fetchedObjects management. In my code, it's initiated by this viewContext.perform { [unowned self] in self.viewContext.mergeChanges(fromContextDidSave: notification) } which is directly followed by the stack trace below. Basically merging data from .NSManagedObjectContextDidSave notification from another NSManagedObjectContext. Nothing special, it works great for years, apart from these rare occurrences. Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGABRT) Exception Codes: 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000 Exception Reason: -[__NSCFArray objectAtIndex:]: index (235) beyond bounds (234) Termination Reason: SIGNAL 6 Abort trap: 6 Triggered by Thread: 0 Last Exception Backtrace: 0 CoreFoundation 0x199e947cc __exceptionPreprocess + 164 (NSException.m:249) 1 libobjc.A.dylib 0x1971672e4 objc_exception_throw + 88 (objc-exception.mm:356) 2 CoreFoundation 0x199fc4258 _NSArrayRaiseBoundException + 368 (NSCFArray.m:22) 3 CoreFoundation 0x199e288a4 -[__NSCFArray objectAtIndex:] + 200 (NSCFArray.m:42) 4 CoreData 0x1a1e17338 -[_PFMutableProxyArray objectAtIndex:] + 40 (_PFArray.m:1860) 5 CoreData 0x1a1e1673c -[NSFetchedResultsController _updateFetchedObjectsWithInsertChange:] + 380 (NSFetchedResultsController.m:1582) 6 CoreData 0x1a1e1426c __82-[NSFetchedResultsController(PrivateMethods) _core_managedObjectContextDidChange:]_block_invoke + 2240 (NSFetchedResultsController.m:2171) 7 CoreData 0x1a1dcdf80 developerSubmittedBlockToNSManagedObjectContextPerform + 156 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:4002) 8 CoreData 0x1a1e41a44 -[NSManagedObjectContext performBlockAndWait:] + 216 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:4113) 9 CoreData 0x1a1e41034 -[NSFetchedResultsController _core_managedObjectContextDidChange:] + 124 (NSFetchedResultsController.m:2379) 10 CoreFoundation 0x199e632f4 __CFNOTIFICATIONCENTER_IS_CALLING_OUT_TO_AN_OBSERVER__ + 148 (CFNotificationCenter.c:701) 11 CoreFoundation 0x199e63210 ___CFXRegistrationPost_block_invoke + 88 (CFNotificationCenter.c:194) 12 CoreFoundation 0x199e63158 _CFXRegistrationPost + 436 (CFNotificationCenter.c:222) 13 CoreFoundation 0x199e6170c _CFXNotificationPost + 728 (CFNotificationCenter.c:1248) 14 Foundation 0x198a84ea4 -[NSNotificationCenter postNotificationName:object:userInfo:] + 92 (NSNotification.m:531) 15 CoreData 0x1a1e11650 -[NSManagedObjectContext _createAndPostChangeNotification:deletions:updates:refreshes:deferrals:wasMerge:] + 1736 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:8098) 16 CoreData 0x1a1e10e0c -[NSManagedObjectContext _postRefreshedObjectsNotificationAndClearList] + 164 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:7631) 17 CoreData 0x1a1e0fad8 -[NSManagedObjectContext _processRecentChanges:] + 100 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:7714) 18 CoreData 0x1a1e3563c -[NSManagedObjectContext _coreMergeChangesFromDidSaveDictionary:usingObjectIDs:withClientQueryGeneration:] + 3436 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:3723) 19 CoreData 0x1a1e34350 __116+[NSManagedObjectContext(_NSCoreDataSPI) _mergeChangesFromRemoteContextSave:intoContexts:withClientQueryGeneration:]_block_invoke_4 + 76 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:9531) 20 CoreData 0x1a1dcdf80 developerSubmittedBlockToNSManagedObjectContextPerform + 156 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:4002) 21 CoreData 0x1a1e41a44 -[NSManagedObjectContext performBlockAndWait:] + 216 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:4113) 22 CoreData 0x1a1e39880 +[NSManagedObjectContext _mergeChangesFromRemoteContextSave:intoContexts:withClientQueryGeneration:] + 2372 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:9537) 23 CoreData 0x1a1e344a0 -[NSManagedObjectContext mergeChangesFromContextDidSaveNotification:] + 292 (NSManagedObjectContext.m:0)

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

I want to get to a point where I can use a small view with a query for my SwiftData model like this: @Query private var currentTrainingCycle: [TrainingCycle] init(/*currentDate: Date*/) { _currentTrainingCycle = Query(filter: #Predicate<TrainingCycle> { $0.numberOfDays > 0 // $0.startDate < currentDate && currentDate < $0.endDate }, sort: \.startDate) } The commented code is where I want to go. In this instance, it'd be created as a lazy var in a viewModel to have it stable (and not constantly re-creating the view). Since it was not working, I thought I could check the same view with a query that does not require any dynamic input. In this case, the numberOfDays never changes after instantiation. But still, each time the app tries to create this view, the app becomes unresponsive, the CPU usage goes at 196%, memory goes way high and the device heats up quickly. Am I holding it wrong? How can I have a dynamic predicate on a View in SwiftUI with SwiftData?

I have not had any successful Schema Migration with CloudKit so far so I'm trying to do with with just very basic attributes, with multiple Versioned Schemas This is the code in my App Main var sharedModelContainer: ModelContainer = { let schema = Schema(versionedSchema: AppSchemaV4.self) do { return try ModelContainer( for: schema, migrationPlan: AppMigrationPlan.self, configurations: ModelConfiguration(cloudKitDatabase: .automatic)) } catch { fatalError("Could not create ModelContainer: \(error)") } }() var body: some Scene { WindowGroup { ItemListView() } .modelContainer(sharedModelContainer) } And this is the code for my MigrationPlan and VersionedSchemas. typealias Item = AppSchemaV4.Item3 enum AppMigrationPlan: SchemaMigrationPlan { static var schemas: [any VersionedSchema.Type] { [AppSchemaV1.self, AppSchemaV2.self, AppSchemaV3.self, AppSchemaV4.self] } static var stages: [MigrationStage] { [migrateV1toV2, migrateV2toV3, migrateV3toV4] } static let migrateV1toV2 = MigrationStage.lightweight( fromVersion: AppSchemaV1.self, toVersion: AppSchemaV2.self ) static let migrateV2toV3 = MigrationStage.lightweight( fromVersion: AppSchemaV2.self, toVersion: AppSchemaV3.self ) static let migrateV3toV4 = MigrationStage.custom( fromVersion: AppSchemaV3.self, toVersion: AppSchemaV4.self, willMigrate: nil, didMigrate: { context in // Fetch all Item1 instances let item1Descriptor = FetchDescriptor<AppSchemaV3.Item1>() let items1 = try context.fetch(item1Descriptor) // Fetch all Item2 instances let item2Descriptor = FetchDescriptor<AppSchemaV3.Item2>() let items2 = try context.fetch(item2Descriptor) // Convert Item1 to Item3 for item in items1 { let newItem = AppSchemaV4.Item3(name: item.name, text: "Migrated from Item1 on \(item.date)") context.insert(newItem) } // Convert Item2 to Item3 for item in items2 { let newItem = AppSchemaV4.Item3(name: item.name, text: "Migrated from Item2 with value \(item.value)") context.insert(newItem) } try? context.save() } ) } enum AppSchemaV1: VersionedSchema { static var versionIdentifier: Schema.Version = Schema.Version(1, 0, 0) static var models: [any PersistentModel.Type] { [Item1.self] } @Model class Item1 { var name: String = "" init(name: String) { self.name = name } } } enum AppSchemaV2: VersionedSchema { static var versionIdentifier: Schema.Version = Schema.Version(2, 0, 0) static var models: [any PersistentModel.Type] { [Item1.self] } @Model class Item1 { var name: String = "" var date: Date = Date() init(name: String) { self.name = name self.date = Date() } } } enum AppSchemaV3: VersionedSchema { static var versionIdentifier: Schema.Version = Schema.Version(3, 0, 0) static var models: [any PersistentModel.Type] { [Item1.self, Item2.self] } @Model class Item1 { var name: String = "" var date: Date = Date() init(name: String) { self.name = name self.date = Date() } } @Model class Item2 { var name: String = "" var value: Int = 0 init(name: String, value: Int) { self.name = name self.value = value } } } enum AppSchemaV4: VersionedSchema { static var versionIdentifier: Schema.Version = Schema.Version(4, 0, 0) static var models: [any PersistentModel.Type] { [Item1.self, Item2.self, Item3.self] } @Model class Item1 { var name: String = "" var date: Date = Date() init(name: String) { self.name = name self.date = Date() } } @Model class Item2 { var name: String = "" var value: Int = 0 init(name: String, value: Int) { self.name = name self.value = value } } @Model class Item3 { var name: String = "" var text: String = "" init(name: String, text: String) { self.name = name self.text = text } } } My experiment was: To create Items for every version of the schema Updating the typealias along the way to reflect the latest Item version. Updating the Schema in my ModelContainer to reflect the latest Schema Version. By AppSchemaV4, I have expected all my Items to be displayed/migrated to Item3, but it does not seem to be the case. I can only see newly created Item3 records. My question is, is there something wrong with how I'm doing the migrations? or are migrations not really working with CloudKit right now?

I built a SwiftData App that relies on CloudKit to synchronize data across devices. That means all model relationships must be expressed as Optional. That’s fine, but there is a limitation in using Optional’s in SwiftData SortDescriptors (Crashes App) That means I can’t apply a SortDescriptor to ModelA using some property value in ModelB (even if ModelB must exist) I tried using a computed property in ModelA that referred to the property in ModelB, BUT THIS DOESN”T WORK EITHER! Am I stuck storing redundant data In ModelA just to sort ModelA as I would like???

My question Is there a way to perform an iCloud keychain reset in order to be able to test CKErrorUserDidResetEncryptedDataKey ? I found this section in the CloudKit documentation https://developer.apple.com/documentation/cloudkit/encrypting-user-data#Handle-a-User-Keychain-Reset I want to be prepared for the zoneNotFound / CKErrorUserDidResetEncryptedDataKey case. However, I can't find a way to actually reproduce this error with an iCloud (test-) user and can't find any Apple documentation on how to perform sucha "User Keychain Reset". The only thing that almost looked like it I came across was in the Keychain.app's Settings "Reset Default Keychains…". However, performing this didn't seem to affect the CloudKit data used in our App at all. I've been trying to do this with an Apple account that has 2FA active and a recovery account assigned. We're only targetting >= iOS 18, macOS >= 15.

If an app is using top-level models, meaning they exist outside the VersionedSchema enum, is it safe to keep them outside of the VersionedSchema enum and use a migration plan for simple migrations. Moving the models within the VersionedSchema enum I believe would change the identity of the models and result in data being lost, although correct me if I'm wrong in that statement. The need presently is just to add another variable to the model and then set that variable within the init function: var updateId = UUID() The app is presently in TestFlight although I'd like to preserve data for users that are currently using the app. The data within SwiftData is synchronized with CloudKit and so I'd also like to avoid any impact to synchronization. Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.

I found that the enumerateItems function is only called when a directory is opened for the first time. If the same directory is opened in the future, enumerateItems will not be called again. Can you set or actively trigger the call to the enumerateItems function

Currently tested, if the file provider goes offline (referring to calling disconnect) and deletes a file, the system will automatically trigger the deleteItems event after reconnecting (note that only after calling reconnect again will the current deleteItems logic be reached). However, for offline deletion, I would like to pass it directly without operating on the cloud. Can mounting disks determine which operations were performed offline during reboot

I have a SwiftData model where I need to customize behavior based on the value of a property (connectorType). Here’s a simplified version of my model: @Model public final class ConnectorModel { public var connectorType: String ... func doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType() { ... } } I’d like to implement doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType in a way that allows the behavior to vary depending on connectorType, and I want to follow best practices for scalability and maintainability. I’ve come up with three potential solutions, each with pros and cons, and I’d love to hear your thoughts on which one makes the most sense or if there’s a better approach: **Option 1: Use switch Statements ** func doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType() { switch connectorType { case "HTTP": // HTTP-specific logic case "WebSocket": // WebSocket-specific logic default: // Fallback logic } } Pros: Simple to implement and keeps the SwiftData model observable by SwiftUI without any additional wrapping. Cons: If more behaviors or methods are added, the code could become messy and harder to maintain. **Option 2: Use a Wrapper with Inheritance around swiftdata model ** @Observable class ParentConnector { var connectorModel: ConnectorModel init(connectorModel: ConnectorModel) { self.connectorModel = connectorModel } func doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType() { fatalError("Not implemented") } } @Observable class HTTPConnector: ParentConnector { override func doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType() { // HTTP-specific logic } } Pros: Logic for each connector type is cleanly organized in subclasses, making it easy to extend and maintain. Cons: Requires introducing additional observable classes, which could add unnecessary complexity. **Option 3: Use a @Transient class that customizes behavior ** protocol ConnectorProtocol { func doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType(connectorModel: ConnectorModel) } class HTTPConnectorImplementation: ConnectorProtocol { func doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType(connectorModel: ConnectorModel) { // HTTP-specific logic } } Then add this to the model: @Model public final class ConnectorModel { public var connectorType: String @Transient public var connectorImplementation: ConnectorProtocol? // Or alternatively from swiftui I could call myModel.connectorImplementation.doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType() to avoid this wrapper func doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType() { connectorImplementation?.doSomethingDifferentForEveryConnectorType(connectorModel: self) } } Pros: Decouples model logic from connector-specific behavior. Avoids creating additional observable classes and allows for easy extension. Cons: Requires explicitly passing the model to the protocol implementation, and setup for determining the correct implementation needs to be handled elsewhere. My Questions Which approach aligns best with SwiftData and SwiftUI best practices, especially for scalable and maintainable apps? Are there better alternatives that I haven’t considered? If Option 3 (protocol with dependency injection) is preferred, what’s the best way to a)manage the transient property 2) set the correct implementation and 3) pass reference to swiftdata model? Thanks in advance for your advice!

Hi there We're using CloudKit in our app which, generally, syncs data perfectly between devices. However, recently the sync has stopped working (some changes will never sync and the sync is delayed for several days even with the app open on all devices). CloudKit's logs show the error „You can't save and delete the same record" and „Already have a mirrored relationship registered for this key", etc. We’ve a hunch that this issue is related to a mirrored relationship of one database entity. Our scenario: We've subclassed the database entities. The database model (which we can't share publicly) contains mirrored relationships. We store very long texts in the database (similar to a Word document that contains markup data – in case that’s relevant). Deleting all data and starting with a completely new container and bundle identifier didn’t help (we tried that multiple times). This issue occurs on macOS (15.2（24C101) as well on iOS (18.2). Any hints on how to get the sync working again? Should we simply avoid mirrored relationships? Many thanks

We have an unreleased SwiftData app for iOS18+. While we were testing I saw reports on the forum about unexpected database migrations for codable arrays on iOS26.1. I'd like to ask a couple of questions: 1- Does this issue originate from the new Xcode version, or is it specific to iOS 26.1? 2- Is it possible to change our attribute so that users on older iOS versions receive the same model, preventing a migration from being triggered when they upgrade to iOS 26.1? One of our models looks like this: struct Point: Codable, Hashable { let x: Int let y: Int } @Model class Grid { private(set) var gridId: String = "" var points: [Point] = [] var updatedAt: Date = Date() private(set) var createdAt: Date = Date() #Index<Grid>([\.gridId]) ... } I can think of some options like: // 1 @Attribute(.transformable(by: CustomJsonTransformer.self)) var points: [Point] = [] // 2 @Attribute(.externalStorage) var points: [Point] = [] // 3 var points: Data = Data() // store points as data However, I'm not sure which one to use. What would you recommend to handle this, or is there a better strategy you would suggest?

I'm writing some tests to confirm the behavior of my app. White creating a model actor to delete objects I realized that ModelContext.model(for:) does return objects that are deleted. I was able to reproduces this with this minimal test case: @Model class Activity { init() {} } struct MyLibraryTests { let modelContainer = try! ModelContainer( for: Activity.self, configurations: ModelConfiguration( isStoredInMemoryOnly: true ) ) init() throws { let context = ModelContext(modelContainer) context.insert(Activity()) try context.save() } @Test func modelForIdAfterDelete() async throws { let context = ModelContext(modelContainer) let id = try context.fetch(FetchDescriptor<Activity>()).first!.id context.delete(context.model(for: id) as! Activity) try context.save() let result = context.model(for: id) as? Activity #expect(result == nil) // Expectation failed: (result → MyLibrary.Activity) == nil } @Test func fetchDescriptorAfterDelete() async throws { let context = ModelContext(modelContainer) let id = try context.fetch(FetchDescriptor<Activity>()).first!.id context.delete(context.model(for: id) as! Activity) try context.save() let result = try context.fetch( FetchDescriptor<Activity>(predicate: #Predicate { $0.id == id }) ).first #expect(result == nil) } } Here I create a new context, insert an model and save it. The test modelForIdAfterDelete does fail, as result still contains the deleted object. I also tried to check #expect(result!.isDeleted), but it is also false. With the second test I use a FetchDescriptor to retrieve the object by ID and it correctly returns nil. Shouldn't both methods use a consistent behavior?

Hey, For some reason I see crashes for my iOS app related to CloudKit entitlements. The crash happens on start up and it says: "CKException - Application has malformed entitlements. Found value "*" for entitlement com.apple.developer.icloud-services, expected an array of strings" I have checked my entitlements of the same build on App Store Connect and it shows "com.apple.developer.icloud-services: ( "CloudKit" )" So I am not sure why users are having this issue. I haven't been able to reproduce it. Does anyone have any idea why this is happening? Thanks

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 a simple model that contains a one-to-many relationship to itself to represent a simple tree structure. It is set to cascade deletes so deleting the parent node deletes the children. Unfortunately I get an error when I try to batch delete. A test demonstrates: @Model final class TreeNode { var parent: TreeNode? @Relationship(deleteRule: .cascade, inverse: \TreeNode.parent) var children: [TreeNode] = [] init(parent: TreeNode? = nil) { self.parent = parent } } func testBatchDelete() throws { let config = ModelConfiguration(isStoredInMemoryOnly: true) let container = try ModelContainer(for: TreeNode.self, configurations: config) let context = ModelContext(container) context.autosaveEnabled = false let root = TreeNode() context.insert(root) for _ in 0..<10 { let child = TreeNode(parent: root) context.insert(child) } try context.save() // fails if first item doesn't have a nil parent, succeeds otherwise // which row is first is random, so will succeed sometimes try context.delete(model: TreeNode.self) } The error raised is: CoreData: error: Unhandled opt lock error from executeBatchDeleteRequest Constraint trigger violation: Batch delete failed due to mandatory OTO nullify inverse on TreeNode/parent and userInfo { NSExceptionOmitCallstacks = 1; NSLocalizedFailureReason = "Constraint trigger violation: Batch delete failed due to mandatory OTO nullify inverse on TreeNode/parent"; "_NSCoreDataOptimisticLockingFailureConflictsKey" = ( ); } Interestingly, if the first record when doing an unsorted query happens to be the parent node, it works correctly, so the above unit test will actually work sometimes. Now, this can be "solved" by changing the reverse relationship to an optional like so: @Relationship(deleteRule: .cascade, inverse: \TreeNode.parent) var children: [TreeNode]? The above delete will work fine. However, this causes issues with predicates that test counts in children, like for instance deleting only nodes where children is empty for example: try context.delete(model: TreeNode.self, where: #Predicate { $0.children?.isEmpty ?? true }) It ends up crashing and dumps a stacktrace to the console with: An uncaught exception was raised Keypath containing KVC aggregate where there shouldn't be one; failed to handle children.@count (the stacktrace is quite long and deep in CoreData's NSSQLGenerator) Does anyone know how to work around this?

I've run into a strange issue. If a sheet loads a view that has a SwiftData @Query, and there is an if statement in the view body, I get the following error when running an iOS targetted SwiftUI app under MacOS 26.1: Set a .modelContext in view's environment to use Query While the view actually ends up loading the correct data, before it does, it ends up re-creating the sqlite store (opening as /dev/null). The strange thing is that this only happens if there is an if statement in the body. The statement need not ever evaluate true, but it causes the issue. Here's an example. It's based on the default xcode new iOS project w/ SwiftData: struct ContentView: View { @State private var isShowingSheet = false var body: some View { Button(action: { isShowingSheet.toggle() }) { Text("Show Sheet") } .sheet(isPresented: $isShowingSheet, onDismiss: didDismiss) { VStack { ContentSheetView() } } } func didDismiss() { } } struct ContentSheetView: View { @Environment(\.modelContext) private var modelContext @Query public var items: [Item] @State var fault: Bool = false var body: some View { VStack { if fault { Text("Fault!") } Button(action: addItem) { Label("Add Item", systemImage: "plus") } List { ForEach(items) { item in Text(item.timestamp, format: Date.FormatStyle(date: .numeric, time: .standard)) } } } } private func addItem() { withAnimation { let newItem = Item(timestamp: Date()) modelContext.insert(newItem) } } } It requires some data to be added to trigger, but after adding it and dismissing the sheet, opening up the sheet with trigger the Set a .modelContext in view's environment to use Query. Flipping on -com.apple.CoreData.SQLDebug 1 will show it trying to recreate the database. If you remove the if fault { Text("Fault!") } line, it goes away. It also doesn't appear to happen on iPhones or in the iPhone simulator. Explicitly passing modelContext to the ContentSheetView like ContentSheetView().modelContext(modelContext) also seems to fix it. Is this behavior expected?

If use a SortDescriptor for a model and sort by some attribute from a relationship, in DEBUG mode it all works fine and sorts. However, in release mode, it is an instant crash. SortDescriptor(.name, order: .reverse) ---- works SortDescriptor(.assignedUser?.name, order: .reverse) ---- works in debug but crash in release. What is the issue here, is it that SwiftData just incompetent to do this?