thanks for checking this in for me. I filed issue http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ADFFACES-243
so that the renderers for UIXTree and UIXTreeTable can take advantage of this new api to prune the client-rowkey map when nodes are collapsed. at the moment this client-rowkey cache grows indefinitely (note that it grew indefinitely for these components, even before issue 210 was fixed). --arjuna On 10/16/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I made a few minor changes to this as reported on http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ADFFACES-210 On 10/15/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've updated > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ADFFACES-210 > > with this discussion and a patch. > let me know what you think. > > On 10/9/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > sorry, that last method has to be public (Renderer needs access to it > > during encodeBegin to do pruning). > > so UIXCollection has: > > public String getClientRowKey() > > public void setClientRowKey(String clientKey) > > public final ClientRowKeyManager getClientRowKeyManager() > > > > > > > > On 10/9/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I was trying to implement this, and immediately ran into the > > > following issue: > > > > > > The new Renderer was storing the clientRowKey-ServerRowKey cache as > > > a private attribute on the component. > > > but this fails when the component is inside a stamping container > > > (ie: nested table case). > > > > > > The rowkey cache must be considered special stamp state, so that it > > > is properly managed by a stamping container. > > > > > > therefore, it has to be managed by the component and must be > > > serializable. So the renderer cannot implement the > > > ClientRowKeyManager interface. > > > Instead, the Renderer implements a ClientRowKeyManagerProducer > > > interface. > > > > > > so to summarize, > > > ClientRowKeyManagerProducer has a method > > > public ClientRowKeyManager > > > getClientRowKeyManager(FacesContext,UIComponent) > > > > > > ClientRowKeyManager has > > > public String getClientRowKey(FacesContext, UIComponent table, > > > Object rowKey); > > > public Object getRowKey(FacesContext, UIComponent table, String > > > clientRowKey); > > > > > > and UIXCollection has: > > > public String getClientRowKey() > > > public void setClientRowKey(String clientKey) > > > protected final ClientRowKeyManager getClientRowKeyManager() > > > > > > Let me know your thoughts and I can start on this implementation. > > > --arjuna > > > > > > > > > > On 10/7/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I decided to call this > > > > > > ClientRowKeyManager: > > > > > > > > > > > > public String getClientRowKey(FacesContext, UIComponent table, > > > > Object > > > > > > rowKey); > > > > > > public Object getRowKey(FacesContext, UIComponent table, > > > > String > > > > > > clientRowKey); > > > > > > > > > > > > what d'ya think? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you're having doubts about having the text "Renderer" be > > > > in the > > > > > > > interface name, can we go back to > > > > > > > RowKeyStringManager > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > I like having the work "String" in there, since this is > > > > going to > > > > > manage > > > > > > > mapping RowKeys to Strings. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The interface would have two methods: > > > > > > > public String getRowKeyString(FacesContext, UIComponent > > > > table, Object > > > > > > > rowKey); > > > > > > > public Object getRowKey(FacesContext, UIComponent table, > > > > String > > > > > > > rowKeyStr); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or do you prefer > > > > > > > public String getStringKey(FacesContext, UIComponent table, > > > > Object > > > > > > > rowKey); > > > > > > > public Object getRowKey(FacesContext, UIComponent table, > > > > String > > > > > > > rowKeyStr); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Adam, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the absence, we should have a default implementation > > > > > > > > > that is exactly the current implementation, and > > > > > table/tree/treeTable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can all use it. Maybe a protected > > > > getRowKeyManagingRenderer() > > > > > > > > > hook up on UIXCollection that provides this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the current implementation clears the cache at the start > > > > of > > > > > encode. > > > > > > > > So if the default implementation is not the renderer, then > > > > how will > > > > > it > > > > > > > > get called at the start of encode, so that it can clear > > > > the > > > > > > > > cache? > > > > > > > > I suppose I could add some secret hook. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But after reading that second paragraph, I'm starting to > > > > > > > > > doubt my first - maybe renderers won't always be > > > > > > > > > the only way to hook this in, so it shouldn't have > > > > "Renderer" > > > > > > > > > in the name? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > perhaps. Although it is difficult to see how this cache > > > > can be > > > > > > > > properly managed without the intimate cooperation of the > > > > renderer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --arjuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/1/06, Adam Winer < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to have the name of the interface end in > > > > Renderer, > > > > > > > > > so it's obvious that Renderers are supposed to implement > > > > > > > > > it. So, maybe RowKeyManagingRenderer? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the absence, we should have a default implementation > > > > > > > > > that is exactly the current implementation, and > > > > > table/tree/treeTable > > > > > > > > > can all use it. Maybe a protected > > > > getRowKeyManagingRenderer() > > > > > > > > > hook up on UIXCollection that provides this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But after reading that second paragraph, I'm starting to > > > > > > > > > > > > > doubt my first - maybe renderers won't always be > > > > > > > > > the only way to hook this in, so it shouldn't have > > > > "Renderer" > > > > > > > > > in the name? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Adam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/29/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What would you like to call this new Renderer > > > > interface? > > > > > > > > > > Is RowKeyStringManager ok? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, in the absence of a RowKeyStringManager what > > > > should the > > > > > > > > > > table/tree/treeTable do > > > > > > > > > > when get/setCurrencyString() is called? > > > > > > > > > > 1. throw an exception > > > > > > > > > > 2. return the index as the string key (this will work > > > > for table, > > > > > > > > > but not > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > trees). > > > > > > > > > > 3. return the base64 encoded, serialized key. > > > > > > > > > > 4. do #2 for tables, and #3 for trees/treeTables. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My vote is for #3, and second preference for #1. > > > > > > > > > > Note that returning the index as the rowkey string (#2 > > > > and #4) > > > > > > > > > will break > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > rows have been inserted/deleted from the underlying > > > > model. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which do you think we should do? > > > > > > > > > > --arjuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/29/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ADFFACES-210 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/26/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sorry for the delay. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure if I got it completely, but your > > > > suggestion to move > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > stuff from UIXColl. to a Renderer API makes pretty > > > > much > > > > > sense. > > > > > > > > > At > > > > > > > > > > > > least from that what I understand. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The customized treeTable "support" might be much > > > > much more > > > > > > > > > important, > > > > > > > > > > > > when all of the renderer api overhauls are done. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can you nail this issue into Jira? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/22/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently the UIXCollection class (which is the > > > > super > > > > > class > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > table/tree/treeTable) maintains a mapping > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > Object rowkeys and String tokens. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > private ValueMap<Object> _currencyCache = > > > > null; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to suggest that we move this > > > > mapping from the > > > > > > > > > component > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > into the corresponding renderer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > We would still have the methods > > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXCollection.getCurrencyString() > > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXCollection.setCurrencyString (..) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, these would call into the renderer and > > > > the > > > > > renderer > > > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > > > > > maintain > > > > > > > > > > > > > the mapping, and would control pruning of the > > > > mapping. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why should we do this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason is that only the renderer knows > > > > exactly which > > > > > > > > > tokens are > > > > > > > > > > > > still > > > > > > > > > > > > > being used on the client-side. The component > > > > does not know > > > > > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > And so the component does not know when to clear > > > > or prune > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > mapping. > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the moment the component is clearing the > > > > mapping at the > > > > > > > > > start of > > > > > > > > > > > > each > > > > > > > > > > > > > encode cycle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > But this breaks some 3rd party renderers which > > > > are still > > > > > > > > > displaying > > > > > > > > > > > > certain > > > > > > > > > > > > > rows on the client-side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A good example is the treeTable component. Let's > > > > say the > > > > > > > > > tree is > > > > > > > > > > > > rendering a > > > > > > > > > > > > > certain set of rows. The tokens for these rows > > > > are being > > > > > > > > > held in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > mapping. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now the user expands a node, introducing a new > > > > subset of > > > > > > > > > rows. > > > > > > > > > > Tokens > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > these rows are now needed (in addition to the > > > > existing > > > > > > > > > tokens). > > > > > > > > > > > > > The encode phase starts and the mapping is > > > > cleared. > > > > > > > > > > > > > The current trinidad treeTable renderer > > > > rerenders the > > > > > entire > > > > > > > > > tree, > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > > > > > > tokens (including the ones for the newly > > > > inserted rows are > > > > > > > > > > recreated) > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > things work fine. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now let's suppose a 3rd party treeTable renderer > > > > has an > > > > > > > > > optimization > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > only rerenders the part that was inserted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the component cleared the mapping, only > > > > the tokens > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > newly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > inserted rows will exist. The tokens for the old > > > > set of > > > > > rows > > > > > > > > > (which > > > > > > > > > > > > still > > > > > > > > > > > > > exist) on the client-side > > > > > > > > > > > > > are missing. Things will break during decode > > > > when the > > > > > > > > > treeTable is > > > > > > > > > > > > > subsequently submitted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suggested Changes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Introduce a new Renderer API called , for eg: > > > > > > > > > RowKeyTokenManager, or > > > > > > > > > > > > > RowKeyStringManager, or CurrencyStringManager. > > > > > > > > > > > > > The tableRenderer would implement this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > The UIXCollection class would cast its renderer > > > > into an > > > > > > > > > instance of > > > > > > > > > > > > this new > > > > > > > > > > > > > API and use it to handle the > > > > > > > > > > > > > get/setCurrencyString methods. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It would be up to the renderer to prune and > > > > manage the > > > > > > > > > lifecycle of > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > token strings. > > > > > > > > > > > > > The renderer would probably store the mapping as > > > > a private > > > > > > > > > attribute > > > > > > > > > > > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > component so that it is properly serialized > > > > along with the > > > > > > > > > > component. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Arjuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > further stuff: > > > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
