I am experiencing some delay in rendering part as my page contains lots of components like (inputs and labels etc). I have placed them in panelgridlayout.
I also used audit method in jdev there also found lots of time is taken by rendering.
So, I want to know which component will be the best or suitable for this. I also implemented panelGroupLayout (with horizontal and vertical) and panelfromlayout but has same slow rendering problem.
Please help me on this.
You need to check how many layout managers you have inside of others. Too many layout managers inside one another can affect render speed.
PanelGroup Layout is for taking a "small" island of content and making its contents horiz, vertical - like buttons or fields or even groups of other islands of content - or add scroll bars if needed, like for a table.
PanelGrid layout is designed to layout a "larger" area and give the layout a grid and allow you to place items almost exactly where you want it.
Some layout managers are designed to layout "the whole page" - like PanelStretch, PanelSlider and PanelGrid, while others are for specialized tasks or group of content, like PanelGroup, FormLayout, Tab, Accordion.
So, depending on the layout, using PanelGrid may mean you do not need the others, and can simply free position all the item which may speed up rendering.
That said, there are many variables that affect rendering speed, and the complexity of the items on the ADF Faces page is not the first thing we look at - The ADF Model layer, how that is implemented and how the data source is tuned (or not) can be a bigger source of impact on rendering.
You did not specify version, that would help as well.
Before PanelGrid we tended to use PanelStretch or PanelSlider as the main window layouts that laid out the main sections of the page - and put the other ones - panel group and formlayout inside it. With the advent of PanelGrid, some of this practice is no longer needed.
This, this and this may help as well.
Related
I have a client who is using Squarespace and asked that I fix a mobile stacking issue.
I have 2 rows that have image + text alternating side by side. This looks fine on desktop, but the on mobile the stacking order is wrong.
Desktop Stacking:
Image + Text
Text + Image
Current Mobile Stacking:
Image
Text
Text
Image
Ideal Stacking:
Image
Text
Image
Text
Typically I was accomplish this by alternating the sections with a custom class, but I'm not seeing any place to add this. Are you able to add custom classes to sections?
Any help is appreciated. Thanks!
It is not possible to directly edit the markup that appears within Squarepace's default grid and block system (they call it, "LayoutEngine"). Generally speaking, one must either write their own HTML within a Code Block (or via Code Injection points), or use JavaScript to alter the HTML after the default markup is loaded onto the page.
But in your case specifically, this is a common problem in Squarespace, and it is usually solved with just CSS, using a combination of:
first-child, last-child and nth-child selectors, and/or
the > direct-descendant/child-combinator, and/or
specific block IDs (each sqs-block has a unique id attribute), and/or
a media query so that the rules only take affect after your mobile breakpoint is reached, and/or
either display:flex with the order property. or display:table-header with display:table-footer in order to force a different stacking order.
The specific CSS often varies greatly based on the specific circumstance, whether you're trying to reorder blocks, columns, or rows. The similar question linked to above provides a specific solution to the same problem you are trying to solve, but the code that solves it in your case may look quite different, though it will likely use a combination of the five things mentioned above.
Or, you can use JavaScript to target the blocks and add your own classes, then write the CSS with those classes. Even in that case, the general approach is the same.
I'm working on a form that shows many our company's products in a FlowLayout, but on some categories that hold many products, performance in scrolling is noticeably affected. I switched to a List so I could leverage the performance benefits of using a renderer, but now I'm not happy with the layout since there's a lot of wasted space, especially if the device is in landscape mode.
My next thought was to use a Table, which I believe also uses renderers to optimize the display of its data; but to mimic a FlowLayout, I'd need to get the preferred width of some placeholder component, then divide the container's width by that to get the number of columns, and then fill the model with that number of columns in mind. I'd also need to change all that if the device changes orientation.
Before I go down that rabbit hole, I'm wondering if I'm making things unnecessarily complicated for myself and if there's already something that I can use to achieve that goal. So to summarize, what would be the most efficient way to display data (that would be shown as buttons) sequentially from left to right, and top to bottom?
I wouldn't use FlowLayout for anything serious although I doubt its the reason for your performance issues, those probably relate to something else. There is a performance how do I video which is a bit old but mostly still relevant: http://www.codenameone.com/how-do-i---improve-application-performance-or-track-down-performance-issues.html
In design terms flow layout is hugely problematic since the elements are not aligned properly thus producing a UI that doesn't look good when spanning multiple rows. I suggest using a grid layout which has a mode called auto fit. By using setAutoFit(true) on a grid of even 1x1 all the elements will take up all available space uniformly based on screen size and adapt with orientation changes.
I have an IOS application designed for ipad. In one page, I display a report to the user and the report requires 5000 UILabels to be rendered on the screen inside a UIScrollView. This causes application to crash due to being out of memory. I know that UITableView has the functionality for loading content on demand. How can I make scroll view render only certain content and as the scrolling happens remove the content that got invisible and add the content that should be visible?
Is there any way you can reconfigure it to use a table view with custom rows, perhaps rows that consist of several labels? That model supports load on demand and resource reuse in a very natural way...
Perhaps you can be more specific on your screen layout?
You should re-cycle (i.e., reuse) the labels just like a table view recycles its table cells. This is sometimes referred to as "tiling" subviews. Tiling allows you to display more than will fit into memory.
I recommend watching WWDC 2012 Session 104. This session's tutorial creates a photo app that tiles image views in a UIScrollView. Although the photo app scrolls pages of content, rather than a grid of items, I think the video could be relevant to your app.
Here's a very brief overview of the tutorial applied to your specific case:
(1.) declare iVars that keep track of your labels:
NSMutableSet *recycledLabels;
NSMutableSet *visibleLabels;
(2.) implement a method that fetches a re-usable label:
- (UILabel *)dequeueRecycledLabel;
(3.) implement a method that does the tiling:
- (void)tileLabels; // this will add/remove labels from the scroll view
(4.) set your scroll view's delegate and call tileLabels in the scrollViewDidScroll: delegate method
- (void)scrollViewDidScroll:(UIScrollView *)scrollView
{
[self tileLabels];
}
The WWDC video will help you fill in the details, which I think are applicable to your case. However, you will have to do plenty of improvising in order to make it work for your specific case. This may not be easy; but its doable.
At the end of the video, tiling with CATileLayer is discussed. I'll be honest, I didn't understand that part. But I don't think it's applicable in your case because you're not displaying large images.
I finally implemented dynamic content loading. The method I implemented is scrollViewDidScroll.
Inside this method I determined the direction of scroll by the following
bool isUp = (currentOffset.y > lastScrollOffset);
Then I determined the visible content rectangle by the following.
CGRect visibleContentRect;
visibleContentRect.origin = scrollView.contentOffset;
visibleContentRect.size = scrollView.bounds.size;
Then I had an array of View Elements and each knew its place in the scroll view because of their frame being set. Long story short, each time scroll happened, I determined the views whose frame either intersected or contained by visible content frame. I added those views to the scroll view. I also determined the ones that disappeared and removed them from scroll view and I also set those views to nil and recreated them. Once [scrollView addSubview:view] method is called, then view gets more space in the memory because it gets visible. [view removeFromSuperView] method doesn't deallocate that space. That's why setting the view to nil and recreating it is necessary.
I'm currently designing a web application which may be viewed by people in all kinds of resolutions 1024..1920 or even larger resolutions.
I've opted for a fixed-width design (as many other popular websites are, e.g. StackOverflow, CNN, Mint, WSJ, BofA etc.) with the lowest common denominator fitting in, meaning 1024.
Now a problem is that on some pages in my application I have to display grid-based data. I think I'm really going to anger people with large screens if I restrict them to 1024 width compacted grid data while keeping most of their screen empty.
I thought about making different style sheets and so forth for different resolutions but that will increase much of the maintenance work, graphics work etc. above of what I can manage.
Do you have any ideas how to solve this is a graceful manner (I'm just thinking maybe I have a 'creative block' here right now :) ) without having to go fully to a fluid design, which brings a bunch of problems in itself?
1) Multiple hard-coded views of the same data: Brief, Detailed, Verbose
Quick links, or tabs to allow the user to view different numbers of columns. If they need more details, they can choose the view that has more detail. They want to know, and will not be annoyed by having to scroll vertically.
2) User-Controlled columns
Allow the users to control what they see, and what columns are included in their view. You can even store and remember the views they select. The default should be the view you think most people would want to see.
3) Combination of the previous two
Allow them to choose a default, and then customize columns on a one-by-one basis. This is how MS Project works with its views, and it's very nice to work with.
Size the columns so that a reasonable number fit onto 1024, and use a horizontal scrollbar for the rest. Since your app doesn't use the extra real estate on other pages, you might decide to just stop there.
Otherwise, let the elements resize to fill the full width of the page if there is extra room (either use a table, or use min-width on the divs and 100% on the parent.
I'm designing some dialog boxes, and I'm having a hard time to fit everything. (and it has to fit on a single dialog box by design, so please don't tell me I should make two dialogs instead of one:))
I'm wondering what's the max size a dialog can have before being annoying for the end user. Of course it should't be bigger than his resolution, but are there any other boundaries to consider?
I'm trying to limit at 800x580 (so that it can display fine on a 800x600 screen without hiding the taskbar), but I expect my users to be on 1024x768 or better screen resolutions.
Is a 800x580 dialog box ok, or is it too big?
Have you considered using a tabbed layout?
Also, I believe the smallest main-stream screen resolution is 1024x600.
I'd say anything over that is too big. I try to stick below 1000x500.
I'm writing this on a netbook (ASUS) with resolution 1024 x 600. I've also noticed this is a defacto standard for most other netbooks too.
Another option: you could create a dialog that resizes itself automatically to fill the current desktop (except for the task bar).
It could also enforce a "flow" style layout for it's child controls. This would ensure the best use of the available space is made.
To get "flowing" in Windows forms you can use either the flow layout control or (for a richer interface) the WebBrowser control.
By the way, modal dialogs seem to be less popular as a way of user interaction these days. Especially large dialogs containing a lot of information/controls. This article has some good alternatives.
I think that if the user NEEDS to see all data on screen at the same time... and you can fit everything in 800x580... I think that it's a fine size.
If you know all users have bigger resolutions so don't struggle... that size is OK.
However... a way of showing lots of information and being able to edit it... could be a PropertyGrid control (an example here)... may be that could shrink a bit the form if you don't feel confortable with it being so big. Don't know if it a possibility given the needs of your client/user.
Just hope that no-one ever tries using your app on a media center running through a standard definition display. That's 640x480 for NTSC. I've suffered this problem with quite a few apps.
Whatever your pixel by pixel size, if it takes more than a few seconds for skilled users to complete the use of your window, then it shouldn’t be a dialog. Anything longer is annoying. You’d be asking your users to do too much work that is too easy to lose (e.g., by hitting Cancel accidentally) and too hard to re-entered (e.g., between sessions). If you have so many controls that the dialog needs to be 800 by anything, then it’s too many controls. 200,000 square pixels and 40 controls is the very most you should consider for a dialog. And tabs are nature’s way of saying your dialog is too complex.
Dialogs are for entering parameters to execute a single command on one or more data objects visible in the primary window for the dialog, which is why dialogs need to be small and simple. I suspect that’s not what you’re doing. Instead, you’re using a “dialog” to represent the main data objects and carry out a major task, not a single command.
What you want is a primary window, not a dialog, with all the support necessary for the complicated task you’ve set up for the user. That includes providing a means for users to save, retrieve, and copy their work. That means a menu bar and toolbar with all the standard commands, including help. The window should absolutely be modeless, and be resizable, maximizable, and minimizable.
Primary windows should be designed to work best at the size of most (over half) of your users’ screens. 1024x768 is generally fine for today’s laptop/desktop screens, not that you should use that much space if you don’t have to. If the user’s screen is smaller, or the user for any reason resizes your window below the design size, then scrollbars should appear to allow full access to all controls and content in the form –just like any primary window. The experience on the web indicates that scrolling is not a showstopper for forms.
Beyond that, tabs may be used in a primary window to increase the number of controls on it. You said you don’t want to hear about multiple windows, but multiple windows should be used instead of tabs if the user will be comparing data across tabs/windows. You can also fit more in a given primary window size by using a compact presentation (I describe this at http://www.zuschlogin.com/?p=42), but test such an approach on your users before committing to it.