Re: Size of ListView
Hi Igor,
Excellent suggestion! It took some experimenting, but we managed to get it
to work.
add(new PropertyListViewMonthAmount(month, new
XListViewModel(x)) {
{
setReuseItems(false);
setVersioned(false);
}
@Override
protected void populateItem(final ListItemMonthAmount item) {
// ... }
@Override
protected void onDetach() {
removeAll();
super.onDetach();
}
});
The gotcha's:
- modifying the component tree AFTER rendering increments the page version,
which is obviously unwanted and causes fatal errors (since the form action
still points the old version of the page which is not stored in the
session).
- disabling versioning of the list view circumvents this. It seems pretty
logical to me - since it is to be re-populated upon each request (it's
pretty much stateless), it should not impact the version.
I'm feeling pretty good about this approach - we'll probably make a separate
ListView component out of it. Do you have any thoughts on it? Should I
create a feature request in Jira to change the implementation of ListView to
behave like I described?
Regards,
Vincent.
On 22 July 2010 18:41, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
what about onDetach() ?
-igor
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com
wrote:
No, we can't change the component tree in onAfterRender - Wicket
complains that it cannot increase the page version after rendering.
On 7/21/10, Vincent Lussenburg vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote:
I remember trying that, but getting slapped by wicket for trying to
change
the component tree after rendering.. Or am I missing something?
We'll doublecheck it tomorrow.
Groet,
Vincent
On Jul 21, 2010, at 18:37, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
if the data is strictly read-only and does not contain any links you
can try removing the list items in afterrender()
-igor
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello all,
We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big
tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was
increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making
everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out
that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k.
Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we
can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible?
Is there another approach?
Danny van Bruggen
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Size of ListView
no, this will not work for the larger usecase. like i mentioned
before, if you place links or textfields or anything but labels into
listitems they will not work.
-igor
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:41 AM, Vincent Lussenburg
vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Igor,
Excellent suggestion! It took some experimenting, but we managed to get it
to work.
add(new PropertyListViewMonthAmount(month, new
XListViewModel(x)) {
{
setReuseItems(false);
setVersioned(false);
}
�...@override
protected void populateItem(final ListItemMonthAmount item) {
// ... }
�...@override
protected void onDetach() {
removeAll();
super.onDetach();
}
});
The gotcha's:
- modifying the component tree AFTER rendering increments the page version,
which is obviously unwanted and causes fatal errors (since the form action
still points the old version of the page which is not stored in the
session).
- disabling versioning of the list view circumvents this. It seems pretty
logical to me - since it is to be re-populated upon each request (it's
pretty much stateless), it should not impact the version.
I'm feeling pretty good about this approach - we'll probably make a separate
ListView component out of it. Do you have any thoughts on it? Should I
create a feature request in Jira to change the implementation of ListView to
behave like I described?
Regards,
Vincent.
On 22 July 2010 18:41, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
what about onDetach() ?
-igor
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com
wrote:
No, we can't change the component tree in onAfterRender - Wicket
complains that it cannot increase the page version after rendering.
On 7/21/10, Vincent Lussenburg vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote:
I remember trying that, but getting slapped by wicket for trying to
change
the component tree after rendering.. Or am I missing something?
We'll doublecheck it tomorrow.
Groet,
Vincent
On Jul 21, 2010, at 18:37, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
if the data is strictly read-only and does not contain any links you
can try removing the list items in afterrender()
-igor
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello all,
We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big
tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was
increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making
everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out
that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k.
Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we
can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible?
Is there another approach?
Danny van Bruggen
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Size of ListView
no, this will not work for the larger usecase. like i mentioned
before, if you place links or textfields or anything but labels into
listitems they will not work.
-igor
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:41 AM, Vincent Lussenburg
vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Igor,
Excellent suggestion! It took some experimenting, but we managed to get it
to work.
add(new PropertyListViewMonthAmount(month, new
XListViewModel(x)) {
{
setReuseItems(false);
setVersioned(false);
}
�...@override
protected void populateItem(final ListItemMonthAmount item) {
// ... }
�...@override
protected void onDetach() {
removeAll();
super.onDetach();
}
});
The gotcha's:
- modifying the component tree AFTER rendering increments the page version,
which is obviously unwanted and causes fatal errors (since the form action
still points the old version of the page which is not stored in the
session).
- disabling versioning of the list view circumvents this. It seems pretty
logical to me - since it is to be re-populated upon each request (it's
pretty much stateless), it should not impact the version.
I'm feeling pretty good about this approach - we'll probably make a separate
ListView component out of it. Do you have any thoughts on it? Should I
create a feature request in Jira to change the implementation of ListView to
behave like I described?
Regards,
Vincent.
On 22 July 2010 18:41, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
what about onDetach() ?
-igor
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com
wrote:
No, we can't change the component tree in onAfterRender - Wicket
complains that it cannot increase the page version after rendering.
On 7/21/10, Vincent Lussenburg vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote:
I remember trying that, but getting slapped by wicket for trying to
change
the component tree after rendering.. Or am I missing something?
We'll doublecheck it tomorrow.
Groet,
Vincent
On Jul 21, 2010, at 18:37, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
if the data is strictly read-only and does not contain any links you
can try removing the list items in afterrender()
-igor
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello all,
We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big
tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was
increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making
everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out
that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k.
Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we
can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible?
Is there another approach?
Danny van Bruggen
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Size of ListView
I suppose so.. Well, at least it's a loophole for big chucks of readonly data.
Thanks for your replies!
Groet,
Vincent
On Jul 26, 2010, at 17:22, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
no, this will not work for the larger usecase. like i mentioned
before, if you place links or textfields or anything but labels into
listitems they will not work.
-igor
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:41 AM, Vincent Lussenburg
vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Igor,
Excellent suggestion! It took some experimenting, but we managed to get it
to work.
add(new PropertyListViewMonthAmount(month, new
XListViewModel(x)) {
{
setReuseItems(false);
setVersioned(false);
}
@Override
protected void populateItem(final ListItemMonthAmount item) {
// ... }
@Override
protected void onDetach() {
removeAll();
super.onDetach();
}
});
The gotcha's:
- modifying the component tree AFTER rendering increments the page version,
which is obviously unwanted and causes fatal errors (since the form action
still points the old version of the page which is not stored in the
session).
- disabling versioning of the list view circumvents this. It seems pretty
logical to me - since it is to be re-populated upon each request (it's
pretty much stateless), it should not impact the version.
I'm feeling pretty good about this approach - we'll probably make a separate
ListView component out of it. Do you have any thoughts on it? Should I
create a feature request in Jira to change the implementation of ListView to
behave like I described?
Regards,
Vincent.
On 22 July 2010 18:41, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
what about onDetach() ?
-igor
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com
wrote:
No, we can't change the component tree in onAfterRender - Wicket
complains that it cannot increase the page version after rendering.
On 7/21/10, Vincent Lussenburg vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote:
I remember trying that, but getting slapped by wicket for trying to
change
the component tree after rendering.. Or am I missing something?
We'll doublecheck it tomorrow.
Groet,
Vincent
On Jul 21, 2010, at 18:37, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
if the data is strictly read-only and does not contain any links you
can try removing the list items in afterrender()
-igor
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello all,
We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big
tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was
increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making
everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out
that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k.
Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we
can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible?
Is there another approach?
Danny van Bruggen
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Size of ListView
No, we can't change the component tree in onAfterRender - Wicket complains that it cannot increase the page version after rendering. On 7/21/10, Vincent Lussenburg vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote: I remember trying that, but getting slapped by wicket for trying to change the component tree after rendering.. Or am I missing something? We'll doublecheck it tomorrow. Groet, Vincent On Jul 21, 2010, at 18:37, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote: if the data is strictly read-only and does not contain any links you can try removing the list items in afterrender() -igor On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k. Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible? Is there another approach? Danny van Bruggen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Size of ListView
what about onDetach() ? -igor On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com wrote: No, we can't change the component tree in onAfterRender - Wicket complains that it cannot increase the page version after rendering. On 7/21/10, Vincent Lussenburg vincent.lussenb...@gmail.com wrote: I remember trying that, but getting slapped by wicket for trying to change the component tree after rendering.. Or am I missing something? We'll doublecheck it tomorrow. Groet, Vincent On Jul 21, 2010, at 18:37, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote: if the data is strictly read-only and does not contain any links you can try removing the list items in afterrender() -igor On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k. Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible? Is there another approach? Danny van Bruggen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Size of ListView
Hello all, We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k. Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible? Is there another approach? Danny van Bruggen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Size of ListView
if the data is strictly read-only and does not contain any links you can try removing the list items in afterrender() -igor On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k. Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible? Is there another approach? Danny van Bruggen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Size of ListView
I remember trying that, but getting slapped by wicket for trying to change the component tree after rendering.. Or am I missing something? We'll doublecheck it tomorrow. Groet, Vincent On Jul 21, 2010, at 18:37, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote: if the data is strictly read-only and does not contain any links you can try removing the list items in afterrender() -igor On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Danny van Bruggen tsuih...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, We're developing a non-Ajax application that displays a bunch of big tables - about five columns, 300 rows. Since session size was increasing a lot, we looked into the cause of it, and (after making everything detachable and switching to PropertyListModel) found out that the ListItems of each ListView still accounted for about 100k. Since all the data in the tables is read only, we're wondering if we can skip serializing the ListItems. Is this possible? Is there another approach? Danny van Bruggen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
