UI performance and large data set in Table Object

Sarah Reichelt sarah.reichelt at gmail.com
Thu Feb 21 20:55:11 EST 2008


>  Hi Sarah,
>  That sounds promising, especially reading prior threads on the same custom
>  property concept.
>  (A thought on this concept of copying data to a custom property - wouldn't
>  it consume large amounts of the users computer memory/resources?)

The data was there already. I actually MOVED it to custom properties
rather than duplicating the data, so the overhead was no worse than it
had been and quite acceptable. The stack ended up at about 6 MB. The
data is not stored forever, it just builds up over 1 - 2 weeks, then
gets cleared and the process starts again.

>  But this is a multi-user application, where many users will be searching,
>  updating, deleting, and adding records into the SQL database thru this Rev
>  app. It's not a read-only application. I think if it was, the custom
>  property could be worth looking at.
>  Mark Stuart

I still think if you do a query and load the entire result into a
custom property, then show only portions of this data at a time in a
field, you will have the best of both worlds - minimizing the number
of trips to the server and minimizing the display times.

Cheers,
Sarah


>
>  Sarah Reichelt-2 wrote:
>  >
>  > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 9:21 AM, mfstuart <mfstuart at cox.net> wrote:
>  >>
>  >>  I haven't tried storing data in a custom property as yet, but wouldn't
>  >> that
>  >>  render the same lack of performance behavior, where putting the data
>  >> into a
>  >>  stack of the UI?
>  >
>  > No, because the engine doesn't have to think about how to display your
>  > data, it's just storing whatever you put in there.
>  >
>  > I got involved in a project were data was being stored in fields on
>  > another card, so not even visible. The amount of data was getting
>  > quite large, about 40,000 lines in each field. When I changed it to
>  > storing the data in custom properties, the speed of adding new data
>  > points dropped from around 3 seconds to about 5 ticks!
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  > Sarah



More information about the Use-livecode mailing list