Currently i implemented React Hooks with Redux. Now the only issue is that when changing the Redux state the performance is going down in my app e.g:
import { cardItemIsDragging, storeWidgetDrag } from '../../redux/actions';
then:
/** pass currentUser and currentChannel from redux to global props */
const mapStateToProps = state => ({
storeWidget: state.storewidgetinfo.storeWidgetInfo,
storeDrag: state.storewidgetdrag.storeWidgetDrag,
storeDelete: state.storewidgetdelete.storeWidgetDelete,
});
and also having:
/** #component */
export default connect(mapStateToProps, {
cardItemIsDragging,
storeWidgetDrag,
})(Layout);
Now inside of this component there is a function that will update the Redux state:
/** Calls when drag starts. */
const onDragStart = () => {
const { cardItemIsDragging } = props;
cardItemIsDragging(true);
};
Im updating this state because im also using it in another component.
The code above is resulting in a performance drop of the component/app, so my question is what is the best practice to setup Redux without losing performance / unnecessary re-rendering of the component, but keep changing state while it is needed in another component.
Related
I have a redux (sub) state that consists of a large number of similar entries.
export type PartnerCalculatorStateShape = {
m16_19:number;
m20_24:number;
m25_34:number;
m35_44:number;
m45_64:number;
m65_plus:number;
f16_19:number;
f20_24:number;
f25_34:number;
f35_44:number;
f45_64:number;
f65_plus:number;
};
I am using the Redux Toolkit so my reducer is of this form (note that Redux Toolkit uses immutable update logic, so I can assign modify the state directly)
type PartnerCalculatorPayload = {
key:string;
value:number;
}
export const partnerCalculatorSlice = createSlice({
name: 'PartnerCalculator',
initialState,
reducers: {
partnerCalculatorValueReceived(state, action: PayloadAction<PartnerCalculatorPayload>) {
state[action.payload.key] = action.payload.value;
}
}
});
I'm a bit stuck on how to use useSelector. What I want to do is have a selector function in my Redux file, something like this
export const selectorFunction = (state,key) => state[key]
where key would be m20_24, for example. Then I would use that selector function in my React component
const myVar = useSelector(selectorFunction)
But how do I pass in the key?
The official hooks documentation recommends using closure to pass additional variables
import React from 'react'
import { useSelector } from 'react-redux'
export const TodoListItem = props => {
const todo = useSelector(state => state.todos[props.id])
return <div>{todo.text}</div>
}
However. useSelector will be in my React component and I want to keep the selector function I pass to useSelector inside my redux file, so I can't see how to use closure.
I suppose I could just pass the entire state out from my selector function
const selectorFunction = state => state
and then treat it as an object in my React component and key into it there
const myState = useSelector(selectorFunction)
const myVar = myState["m20_24"]
but that seems kind of ugly.
If that's the way to go, would myVar update anytime any of the fields in my Redux state changed? I'm a bit unclear as to how the useSelector equality testing mechanism works -- it says it uses 'strict equality', so if any part of my state object changed (that is, if the field 'm20_24' changed) then myVar would be updated?
Thanks for any insights!
Pass an anonymous selector to useSelector, and then call the actual selector inside of there:
const value = useSelector(state => selectValueByKey(state, props.key));
I'm new to React and still struggling in understanding in using redux with React.
For example, below is some code :
const mapStateToProps = (storeData) => ({
editing: storeData.isEditMode;
})
const mapDispatchToProps = {
saveCallback: xxx
}
const connectFunction = connect(mapStateToProps, mapDispatchToProps);
export const ProductDisplay = connectFunction(
class extends Component {
render() {
if (this.props.editing) {
...
} else {
...
}
}
}
)
and a component that uses ProductDisplay
export default class App extends Component {
render() {
return <ProductDisplay/>
}
}
Let's say storeData.isEditMode is changed by other component, so the wrapped component's props.editing is changed. As we know that the only way to trigger update process is to use setState() but how does react know that ProductDisplay component needs to be updated since there is no setState() method involved?
The connect function generates a wrapper component that subscribes to the store. When an action is dispatched, the wrapper component's callback is notified. It then runs your mapState function, and shallow-compares the result object from this time vs the result object from last time (so if you were to rewrite a redux store field with its same value, it would not trigger a re-render). If the results are different, then it passes the results to your "real" component" as props.
Dan Abramov wrote a great simplified version of connect at (connect.js) that illustrates the basic idea, although it doesn't show any of the optimization work.
update
React-Redux v6.0.0 made some major internal changes to how connected components receive their data from the store.
For more details: https://spin.atomicobject.com/2018/04/02/redux-rerendering/
I am trying to find a good, clean, with little boilerplate, way to handle React's global state
The idea here is to have a HOC, taking advantage of React's new Hooks & Context APIs, that returns a Context provider with the value bound to its state. I use rxjs for triggering a state update on store change.
I also export a few more objects from my store (notably : the raw rxjs subject object and a Proxy of the store that always returns the latest value).
This works. When I change something in my global store, I get updates anywhere in the app (be it a React component, or outside React). However, to achieve this, the HOC component re-renders.
Is this a no-op ?
The piece of code / logic I think could be problematic is the HOC component:
const Provider = ({ children }) => {
const [store, setStore] = useState(GlobalStore.value)
useEffect(() => {
GlobalStore.subscribe(setStore)
}, [])
return <Context.Provider value={store}>{children}</Context.Provider>
}
GlobalStore is a rxjs BehaviorSubject. Every time the subject is updated, the state of the Provider component gets updated which triggers a re-render.
Full demo is available there: https://codesandbox.io/s/qzkqrm698q
The real question is: isn't that a poor way of doing global state management ? I feel it might be because I basically re-render everything on state update...
EDIT: I think I have written a more performant version that's not as lightweight (depends on MobX), but I think it generates a lot less overhead (demo at: https://codesandbox.io/s/7oxko37rq) - Now what would be cool would be to have the same end result, but dropping MobX - The question makes no sense anymore
I understand your need to handle a global state. I already found myself in the same situation. We have adopted similar solutions, but in my case, I've decided to completelly drop from ContextAPI.
The ContextAPI really sucks to me. It seems to pretend to be a controller based pattern, but you end up wrapping the code inside an non-sense HOC. Maybe I've missed he point here, but in my opinion the ContextAPI is just a complicated way to offer scoped based data flow.
So, I decided to implement my own global state manager, using React Hooks and RxJS. Mainly because I do not use to work on really huge projects (where Redux would fit perfectly).
My solution is very simple. So lets read some codes because they say more than words:
1. Store
I've created an class only to dar nome aos bois (it's a popular brazilian expression, google it 😊) and to have a easy way to use partial update on BehaviorSubject value:
import { BehaviorSubject } from "rxjs";
export default class Store<T extends Object> extends BehaviorSubject<T> {
update(value: Partial<T>) {
this.next({ ...this.value, ...value });
}
}
2. createSharedStore
An function to instantiate the Store class (yes it is just because I don't like to type new ¯\(ツ)/¯):
import Store from "./store";
export default function <T>(initialValue: T) {
return new Store<T>(initialValue);
}
3. useSharedStore
I created an hook to easily use an local state connected with the Store:
import Store from "./store";
import { useCallback, useEffect, useState } from "react";
import { skip } from "rxjs/operators";
import createSharedStore from "./createSharedStore";
const globalStore = createSharedStore<any>({});
type SetPartialSharedStateAction<S> = (state: S) => S;
type SetSharedStateAction<S> = (
state: S | SetPartialSharedStateAction<S>
) => void;
export default function <T>(
store: Store<T> = globalStore
): [T, SetSharedStateAction<T>] {
const [state, setState] = useState(store.value);
useEffect(() => {
const subscription = store
.pipe(skip(1))
.subscribe((data) => setState(data));
return () => subscription.unsubscribe();
});
const setStateProxy = useCallback(
(state: T | SetPartialSharedStateAction<T>) => {
if (typeof state === "function") {
const partialUpdate: any = state;
store.next(partialUpdate(store.value));
} else {
store.next(state);
}
},
[store]
);
return [state, setStateProxy];
}
4. ExampleStore
Then I export individual stores for each feature that needs shared state:
import { createSharedStore } from "hooks/SharedState";
export default createSharedStore<Models.Example | undefined>(undefined);
5. ExampleComponent
Finally, this is how to use in the component (just like a regular React state):
import React from "react";
import { useSharedState } from "hooks/SharedState";
import ExampleStore from "stores/ExampleStore";
export default function () {
// ...
const [state, setState] = useSharedState(ExampleStore);
// ...
function handleChanges(event) {
setState(event.currentTarget.value);
}
return (
<>
<h1>{state.foo}</h1>
<input onChange={handleChange} />
</>
);
}
GlobalStore subject is redundant. RxJS observables and React context API both implement pub-sub pattern, there are no benefits in using them together this way. If GlobalStore.subscribe is supposed to be used in children to update the state, this will result in unnecessary tight coupling.
Updating glubal state with new object will result in re-rendering the entire component hierarchy. A common way to avoid performance issues in children is to pick necessary state parts and make them pure components to prevent unnecessary updates:
<Context.Consumer>
({ foo: { bar }, setState }) => <PureFoo bar={bar} setState={setState}/>
</Context.Provider>
PureFoo won't be re-rendered on state updates as long as bar and setState are the same.
This is not an issue but rather a question.
I wanted to use React solely for my Global state management and pass the todos through useReducer and useContext and I wonder if this is by any means a right way to go. I was called out by a react coder that this way the components rerender when they aren't supposed to but my element inspection shows only the changed component rerenders. Would please guide me as whether or not I can continue developing this way or have to revert back to Mobx or redux or many other third party state manager libraries.
Yes, you can and it's easier than ever thanks to the new hooks API! For very simple things like for instance, a global theme you can just create a context with React.createContext, and useContext.
For a more robust solution, you can actually implement a Flux architecture with a combination of useContext and useReducer. Here's one I made earlier.
// AcmeContext.js
import React, { useReducer, createContext } from 'react'
const AcmeContext = createContext({})
const actions = {
DO_SOMETHING: 'doSomething'
}
const actionCreators = dispatch => ({
updateComment: comment => {
dispatch({
type: actions.DO_SOMETHING,
payload: comment
})
}
})
// first paramter is your state, second is the action
let reducer = (currentState, { type, payload }) => {
switch (type) {
case actions.DO_SOMETHING:
// important: return a NEW new object for this context, don't change the old currentState
return { ...currentState, hello: payload }
default:
return
}
}
// this component wraps any of the child components that you want to share state with
function AcmeProvider({ children, initialState }) {
const [state, dispatch] = useReducer(reducer, initialState)
const actions = actionCreators(dispatch)
return (
<AcmeContext.Provider value={{ state, actions }}>
{children}
</AcmeContext.Provider>
);
}
export { AcmeContext, AcmeProvider }
Then, you wrap the component you want to provide the context to with the exported provider.
// App.jsx
import { AcmeProvider } from './AcmeContext'
import TestComponent from './TestComponent'
render((
<AcmeProvider initialState={{ hello: 'world' }}>
<TestComponent />
</AcmeProvider>
), document.querySelector('.app'))
Finally, you can call it from the child component.
// TestComponent.jsx
import { AcmeContext } from './AcmeContext'
export default () => {
const { state, actions } = useContext(AcmeContext)
return (
<div>
Hello {state.hello}!
<button onClick={() => actions.updateComment('me')}>Set response on onClick to 'me'</button>
</div>
)
}
This does have a couple of downsides to a full Redux implementation. You don't get the Redux dev tools and you don't get things like redux-thunk which means you'll have to add that logic to the component and get the component to update the context.
Yes you can totally use the default React APIs for full state management on a project. The introduction of hooks makes it easy to manage. useContext has slowly become my favourite hook because it removes the need for consumers and makes the JSX look a bit nicer.
If you are worried about things rerendering too many times, you can still use all of the tricks in the React Toolbox like React.memo.
I'm still new to react/redux, after getting something like this to function
User.js
class User extends React.Component {
componentWillMount() {
this.props.fetchUser(.....);
}
render() {
return (
<Profile />
)
}
export default connect(null, {fetchUser})(User);
Profile.js
class Profile extends React.Component {
render() {
const { user } = this.props
return (
<h1>{user.profile.name}</h1>
)
}
const mapStateToProps = state => ({
user: state.store.user
});
export default connect(mapStateToProps, {})(Profile)
actions.js
export const fetchUser = (.....) => dispatch => {
fetch()
.....
}
reducers.js
case FETCH_USER:
return {
...state,
user: action.payload.user
};
As I understand it, the User component calls an action (fetchUser) from connect on componentWillMount(). That action calls an api, gets the data and the reducer adds that to the store within the state. The Profile component can then use connect to map the data from fetchUser in the store and display that data.
After reading some tutorials including https://github.com/reactjs/redux/blob/master/docs/basics/UsageWithReact.md
It looks like things can be simplified a bit without using classes.
If I were to change the User and Profile components to a more functional way, how would I do it?
eg.
const User = () => {
return (
<Profile />
)
}
how do I dispatch the fetchUser action and how do I simulate it to be called with the flow of componentWillMount()?
or am I just over complicating things?
There is also a way to support lifecycle methods in functional components.
https://www.npmjs.com/package/react-pure-lifecycle
import React from 'react';
import lifecycle from 'react-pure-lifecycle';
// create your lifecycle methods
const componentDidMount = (props) => {
console.log('I mounted! Here are my props: ', props);
};
// make them properties on a standard object
const methods = {
componentDidMount
};
const FunctionalComponent = ({children}) => {
return (
<div>
{children}
</div>
);
};
// decorate the component
export default lifecycle(methods)(FunctionalComponent);
I think you should keep using statefull components with redux...
https://medium.com/#antonkorzunov/2-things-about-purecomponent-you-probable-should-know-b04844a90d4
Redux connect — is a PureComponent.
Yes — a very important thing, a HoC for a molecule is a pure one. And works even inside other pure components. And gets store from a current context.
Same is working, for example, for styled-component — you can wrap it with PureComponent, but it will still react to Theme changes.
Solution is simple — bypass logic, use old school events bus, subcribe, wait and emit events.
Styled-componets:
componentWillMount() {
// subscribe to the event emitter. This
// is necessary due to pure components blocking
// context updates, this circumvents
// that by updating when an event is emitted.
const subscribe = this.context[CHANNEL];
this.unsubscribe = subscribe(nextTheme => { <----- MAGIC
React-redux:
trySubscribe() {
if (shouldSubscribe && !this.unsubscribe) {
this.unsubscribe =
this.store.subscribe(this.handleChange); <----- MAGIC
}
}
componentDidMount() {
this.trySubscribe();
}
Thus, even if parent Pure Component will block any update enables you to catch a change, store update, context variable change, or everything else.
So — something inside pure components is very soiled and absolutely impure. It is driven by side effects!
But this bypass straight logic flow, and works just differently from the rest of application.
So — just be careful. And don’t forget about magic.
Aaaand….
And this is a reason, why any redux store update will cause redraw in each connected component, and why you should use reselect just next to connect HoC —
to stop unnecessary change propagation.
But you should read this from another point of view:
redux-connect is a source of a change propagation.
redux connect is the end of a change propagation. It is still PureComponent.
And this leads to quite handy thing — you can control change propagation with redux-connect only. Just create a boundaries for a change. Lets talk about this in another article.
Conclusion
Pure components keep your application fast. Sometimes — more predictable, but often — less predictable, as long they change the way application works.
Stateless components are not pure, and may run slower than PureComponents by any kind.
But… if you very wish to create a fast application with good user experience — you have to use Pure Component.
No choice. But, now — you know hidden truth, and knew some magic…
React recommends that ajax request be made in componentDidMount(), rather than in componentWillMount(). For more info on this, read this post.
Since you want to make ajax requests in componentDidMount(), you need a class. There are two ways of writing component definitions: functional component and the class component. Functional components are more concise, but you don't get component lifecycle methods like componentDidMount(). Think of it as just a render function that takes props as inputs and outputs DOMs (in JSX). To override those lifecycle methods, you need to define them as a class.
If you want to use Redux, and want to make ajax requests in a Redux action, you should import the action creator function (fetchUser(..) in your case) that makes the ajax request, and dispatch(fetchUser(..)) in componentDidMount(). connect(..)ed components get dispatch(..) function passed to it by Redux store.
If you want to see how it's done in other redux apps, see the official example apps in the redux.js repo, paying attention to actions and containers: https://github.com/reactjs/redux/tree/master/examples
In Your case you can continue with statefull components no wrong in that
,If you need to go with functional way
There is a work arround
https://github.com/mobxjs/mobx/issues/162
Suggestion
Calling the api in componentDidMount will make sense than
componentWillMount , Because you can show the user something is
fetching.
I think,User component is designed nicely.It will act as a container for Profile to provide the Data.
Instead of making Profile component class oriented,it should be Stateless.
Lets User component pass the required data for Profile component.
You don't need to connect Profile component using redux-connect.Just render it as a Child component of User.
Profile
const Profile = (props) => {
const {user, likeProfile} = props;
//likeProfile()//call like this using dom event or programmatically.
return (
<h1>{user.profile.name}</h1>
)
}
You need to make some changes in User component.
Get the state for Profile component via mapStateToProps.
class User extends React.Component {
componentWillMount() {
this.props.fetchUser(.....);
}
render() {
const {user, likeProfile} = this.props;
return (
<Profile user= {user} likeProfile={likeProfile} /> //passed the user data to Profile component vua User
)
}
Map the user state for Profile in User connect.
const mapStateToProps = (state)=>{
return{
user : state.somereducerkey.user //this will be accessible in Profile via props { user}
}
}
export default connect(mapStateToProps, {fetchUser, likeProfile})(User);