I've seen a lot of posts with performance related to using Bindable
Collections like that. One of the dangerous of having such a useful easy API
for updating controls...
Just to expand on what Alex is suggesting, suppose your service call returns
to a function called updateData, and your control is bound to a _data
ArrayCollection
public function updateData(newData:IList):void
{
var newData:Array =[];
for each(var data:Object in IList)
{
_newData.push(data);
}
_data.source = newData;
_data.refresh();
}
That's an extremely basic code example, and actually unnecessary to loop
like that in most cases, but basic principle is get your data structured in
an Array or similar structure, add new items, remove old unnecessary items,
whatever you need to do, concat or replace the source Array of your
ArrayCollection, and then call refresh which will dispatch a
COLLECTION_CHANGE event which will trigger any controls using it as a
dataProvider to update.
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Alex Harui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is enable/disableAutoUpdate, but adding rows one at a time is
> inefficient. Just concat the two arrays and replace the dataprovider
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On
> Behalf Of *whatabrain
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 31, 2008 3:23 PM
> *To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* [flexcoders] How to temporarily stop a dataProvider from
> updating UI
>
>
>
> I've found that adding a lot of rows (1000+) to an AdvancedDataGrid can
> be quite slow, if the rows happen to be visible (in an open node of the
> tree). I don't know why this is the case, especially since it's not the
> case in a regular DataGrid, but I'd like to work around it.
>
> So how can I tell the AdvancedDataGrid to temporarily ignore updates to
> the dataProvider? Once the large number of rows have been added, I'll
> turn the automatic updating back on, for the slow trickle of updates
> that come after that.
>
>
>
