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 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
> wrote:
>> Hi Igor,
>>
>> Excellent suggestion! It took some experimenting, but we managed to get it
>> to work.
>>
>>add(new PropertyListView("month", new
>> XListViewModel(x)) {
>>{
>>setReuseItems(false);
>>setVersioned(false);
>>}
>>
>>@Override
>>protected void populateItem(final ListItem 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 wrote:
>>
>>> what about onDetach() ?
>>>
>>> -igor
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen
>>> 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 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
>>> 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 >>>
>> 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, 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
wrote:
> Hi Igor,
>
> Excellent suggestion! It took some experimenting, but we managed to get it
> to work.
>
> add(new PropertyListView("month", new
> XListViewModel(x)) {
> {
> setReuseItems(false);
> setVersioned(false);
> }
>
> �...@override
> protected void populateItem(final ListItem 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 wrote:
>
>> what about onDetach() ?
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen
>> 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 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
>> 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 > >
>> >>> 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
wrote:
> Hi Igor,
>
> Excellent suggestion! It took some experimenting, but we managed to get it
> to work.
>
> add(new PropertyListView("month", new
> XListViewModel(x)) {
> {
> setReuseItems(false);
> setVersioned(false);
> }
>
> �...@override
> protected void populateItem(final ListItem 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 wrote:
>
>> what about onDetach() ?
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen
>> 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 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
>> 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 > >
>> >>> 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
Hi Igor,
Excellent suggestion! It took some experimenting, but we managed to get it
to work.
add(new PropertyListView("month", new
XListViewModel(x)) {
{
setReuseItems(false);
setVersioned(false);
}
@Override
protected void populateItem(final ListItem 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 wrote:
> what about onDetach() ?
>
> -igor
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen
> 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 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
> 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 >
> >>> 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
what about onDetach() ? -igor On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Danny van Bruggen 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 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 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 >>> 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, 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 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 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 >> 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
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 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 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
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 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
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
