Hi,

I have reduced the number of bindings about as much as I can
reasonably expect to reduce them, removing all bindings to complex
elements, to 444 bindings. The form is still somewhat slow however,
about 1 second to enter 2 characters. I have also tried removing
bindings to prefilled simple elements, bringing it down to 352
bindings, but I feel sort of ambivalent about that optimization. At
any rate it should not be done all the time without users having a
choice to turn it off.  So any other possible optimizations?

The tree display showing all document bindings still shows the
bindings that are no longer explicitly declared, but I guess they are
implicit and this is the reason for the display in the tree?

I'm thinking if there was a way to do multiple forms, via a sort of
workflow system this would allow me to reduce things to a usable
number of bindings. but then how to manage this, in a reasonable
amount of time[should be delivering at the end of this month, and I'm
on vacation now]?

Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen


On 4/10/07, bryan rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Lars,

Yes that's what I figured, I've already removed the generation steps
that takes the complex elements without attributes. I guess I'm at the
point where this is not premature optimization anymore :)
I was just wondering if it would lead to any side-effects to do this.

Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen

On 4/10/07, Lars Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
>
> I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by this...
>
> Consider the following pseudo-form:
>
> <doc>
>    <xf:model>
>      <xf:instance>
>        <a>
>          <b>
>            <c/>
>          </b>
>        </a>
>      </xf:instance>
>      <xf:bind name="binding1" nodeset="/a/b" />
>      <xf:bind name="binding2" nodeset="/a/b/c" />
>    </xf:model>
>    <form>
>      <control xf:bind="binding2" />
>    </form>
> </doc>
>
> In this case, "binding1" dies not serve any useful purpose. It could be
> removed from the document in order to speed up processing in
> OpenOffice.org. Is this what you mean?
>
> Bests,
> Lars
>
> bryan rasmussen wrote:
> > Hi Lars,
> >
> > This is bad news. One solution on my end as a method for decreasing
> > number of bindings, If I bind to a path /a/b/c will OO accept that I
> > neglect the binding to /a/b?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Bryan Rasmussen
> >
> > On 4/5/07, Lars Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi Bryan,
> >>
> >> I checked out your documents. I can confirm, that they perform painfully
> >> slow in OpenOffice.org. I have analyzed what is happening in the
> >> application and found, that the way updates are currently handled in the
> >> xforms implementation is not fit to handle forms with a larger number of
> >> bindings efficiently.
> >>
> >> This means, that I cannot make any useful suggestion on how you could
> >> optimize your form, since the current implementation mostly depends on
> >> the total number of bindings in the document. current.odt includes
> >> almost 1000 binding elements. If you can reduce the number of bindings,
> >> the form would not suffer so badly.
> >>
> >> I suggest, that you file an issue for this and attach your test
> >> documents.
> >>
> >> Thanks you for pointing out this problem.
> >>
> >> Bests,
> >> Lars
> >>
> >> bryan rasmussen wrote:
> >> > oops, forgot to attach the documents
> >> >
> >> > On 3/30/07, bryan rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> Hi, the three attached documents show different Xforms in Open Office.
> >> >>
> >> >> The document params.odt is generated from a very small xml document
> >> >> using a generic transformation I have to output Xforms in Open Office
> >> >> for any well-formed non-mixed content document.
> >> >>
> >> >> The document Order.odt shows a large document   generated with the
> >> >> same transformation that has been edited in design mode (a UBL Order
> >> >> in the Danish subset)
> >> >>
> >> >> The document current.odt shows a large document generated with a
> >> >> transformation that reuses the generic transform but changes display
> >> >> in some instances to make it much better.
> >> >>
> >> >> There is a performance problem with these documents. The first one has
> >> >> no problem. The second one has a slight performance problem in
> >> >> entering information into the fields but it seems to work reasonably
> >> >> well.
> >> >>
> >> >> The final one is so painful to work with that if anyone asked me to do
> >> >> it I would have to consider it an act of aggression.
> >> >>
> >> >> Now there are parts of this third document that are different from the
> >> >> others, but of all these that I am aware of I can't think of any
> >> >> reason why it should cause the whole document to be problem, I am
> >> >> worried it is mainly a problem with document size (which would be a
> >> >> lot worse with a document with say 50 invoice lines instead of the 10
> >> >> the current has. )
> >> >>
> >> >> So I'm hoping that a many eyes effect will have others point out what
> >> >> is causing the performance problem (so long as I can fix it)
> >> >>
> >> >> By the way I think development of solutions using Xforms in OO really
> >> >> needs tools, I have developed some to make things easier for me and am
> >> >> thinking that it might be nice to build some simple structure checking
> >> >> tools that can point out potential performance difficulties.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Cheers,
> >> >> Bryan Rasmussen
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to