The javadoc for Component#put() refers to a now non-existent "childForId map" which got removed 8 years ago [1]!
You might consider making your ListView<T> into a ListView<List<T>> and splitting the original dataset into say 10k List#subLists. It ain't pretty, but for a "(nearly finished)" app, it beats a serious architecture overhaul or waiting for a dubious change to wicket-core. Throw in some item.setRenderBodyOnly(true) and your markup will be none the wiser. :) [1] https://github.com/apache/wicket/commit/0a321ea04887a3113e183b46ab20c1c5d7022de0#wicket/src/java/wicket/MarkupContainer.java On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Marco Springer <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm building a Gantt like interface with Wicket (nearly finished). > It was a requirement to see multiple years of planned items, in the extreme > range even. > > I've down-tuned it to be around max ~3k (8 years) of components in that > listview, through the power of persuasion and as a test. > At 3k components, the getId() method is called quite a reasonable amount of > times. around 4.5M'ish times through the children_indexOf method. > > But you're absolutely right, 100k components is bull. > > Right now I've settled with them that I'd change the view of the Gantt to > be > less detailed when that amount of data is in there. The UI is quite > flexible in > that I can change what I render. > > With 2 years, only 731 columns are rendered, each day is a column. > When > 2 years, I change the view to a more zoomed out version. > With 8 years, only 97 columns are rendered, each month being a column. > > Etc... > > Still with all the components taken in as it is a Gantt chart kinda > interface, > the browsers that I test in are only getting a bit sluggish when I'm > displaying around 2k of components on this Intel Q8200. > I'm not displaying any fancy gif's/flash or whatever, only allot of div's > and > some svg overlays through jsPlumb for dependency display. > > I mainly found it staggering that the getId() function was called that > much. > As Martin said, I'm targeting to limit the amount of components that > should be > rendered now, although sometimes hard with this kind of interface. > > Cheers. > > On Tuesday 26 March 2013 08:23:19 Igor Vaynberg wrote: > > putting a 100000 components into a page is ill advised even if they > > are under different parents. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
