I'd have to agree. I can't see any practical reason why you'd need to display that much data on one page. Aside from the download, and rendering time, the performance of the browser with that much data in memory would be horrible. Scrolling, copying, etc. would all be severely affected.
andy -----Original Message----- From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Kretz Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 9:21 AM To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com Subject: [jQuery] Re: PROBLEM: Adding hover to table rows on large tables Personally, I would recommend looking at a paging solution, rather than trying to deal with so many rows on a single HTML page. I tested a simple 10,000 row table with very little data in it clocked in at a 2mb download, requiring 4 seconds to download and render as a local file on FireFox (i.e. no network traffic, loading the .htm file out of my local file system). And the more DOM elements of the page the harder it is to manipulate with any kind of scripting. If paging your results doesn't work for you, then the tr:hover CSS-only solution would really be the best way to go. JK -----Original Message----- From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of fambizzari Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 2:29 AM To: jQuery (English) Subject: [jQuery] Re: PROBLEM: Adding hover to table rows on large tables The solution i adopted was CSS (tr:hover) for non-IE6 and only allow small tables to have hover-over using a class name to identify them. Any better solutions? On Nov 6, 10:45 am, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The following code works fine on small tables: > > $("table tbody > tr").mouseover(function(){$(this).addClass("over");}).mouseout(function(){$( this).removeClass("over");}); > > But on tables with 5,000-10,000 rows, it throws the "A script on this > page may be busy, or it may have stopped responding. You can stop the > script now, open the script in the debugger, or let the script continue." > > Can anyone suggest a workaround? > > Thanks
