Re: Size of ListView

2010-07-26 Thread Vincent Lussenburg
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

2010-07-26 Thread Igor Vaynberg
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

2010-07-26 Thread Igor Vaynberg
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

2010-07-26 Thread Vincent Lussenburg
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

2010-07-22 Thread Danny van Bruggen
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

2010-07-22 Thread Igor Vaynberg
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

2010-07-21 Thread Igor Vaynberg
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

2010-07-21 Thread Vincent Lussenburg
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