We worked with large lists (1.000+ pages, based on keywords) in a few
projects and also came across the following issue:

- Sometimes you need a list with a large collection but just want to
show the top X items sorted by date (e. g. last 50 news or events).
- We assumed coping with longer loading times in SmartTree is ok when
the list limit ensures performance in SmartEdit
- So we turned to the "limit" setting on list placeholders to achieve
this, also hoping for a significantly better performance as only 100
items need to be rendered by the CMS in detail.
- But: Performance was still bad in SmartEdit and publications so we
asked the Support and Professional Service guys

We had to learn that the limit setting in RedDot CMS does not work as
in other CMS or databases. Which means: Even if a limit of 100 items
is applied, ALL items will be retrieved and processed by the CMS
because RedDot does the sorting itself. This is NOT done on database
level already. I can imagine this causes quite a bit of the
performance problems that come with large lists.

So if you do not work with really simple pages (small amount of
placeholders used) without deeper structures try to think of a way of
splitting up lists right from the beginning.

We experienced this for RedDot CMS 7.1 and below. Upates/other
experience on this issue are welcome!

On 14 Jan., 10:51, abdn_webteam <[email protected]> wrote:
> The title says it all.
>
> We were told by our friendly neighbourhood RedDot consultant that
> there "might be issues" caused by connecting large numbers of items to
> a single list. Has anyone done this, experienced problems and would
> like to share with the group?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"RedDot CMS Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/RedDot-CMS-Users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to