>> In this experiment I think that no deallocations should be taking place, >> as I am just creating a bunch of widgets.
>> The results show that the memory consumption of my application in IE is >> a factor of 7 compared to Firefox. Based on your experience would you >> blame IE guilty for that or could it be some issue with qooxdoo? Can't say. To be honest - you (nor I) don't even know, if RAP 'switches' table-items on-demand - so that even your simple app suffers from the memory leak. (You could find out by looking at the JS though). And even if RAP doesn't switch and you are right with the assumption that widgets are only created but never destroyed by intention - your factor 7 doesn't sound too unrealistic to me for IE. Maybe someone from the qooxdoo guys can tell if they have experiences with such large tables. Maybe you could just create an equal big table with qooxdoo alone, just to get an impression ? Anyway - I just try to make me a picture of your table - and to be honest - it sounds like a wild beast with a very low usability for the end-user (no offense meant ;-)). Aren't there any ways to change the way your app presents data ? And furthermore - in RAP all the data is held at the server side as well - are you sure you can serve as many users as you have to serve with your app? >From what you describe (and what my imagination makes out of this ;-) ) .. this would never be allowed in one of our apps ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ qooxdoo-devel mailing list qooxdoo-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
