Hi William, I've thought of this idea, and actually tested the capacity of the client. I loaded up dummy data on the client side and it can easily take up to 1mil records (though filtering could take a few seconds). The problem is how do I send that much of data from the server side. I'm using openamf to communicate to a java servlet, the servlet goes out of memory trying to serialize about 50K such records. I'm not sure whether this is a limitation of openamf but it occurs to me that there must be some better way to stream the data over without bloating up memory of my servlet container. Any thoughts on this? Thanks.
Ban --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Abyss Knight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Have you considered paging the dataset in the ActionScript, but > applying the operations to the original ArrayCollection/Dataset? What > I mean is, although the grid may only show say 15 records at a time, > the dataset is still stored as an AS object and could be adjusted > client side, and the current "page" reloaded. I'm imagining the > bottleneck isn't the data structure, but rather the DataGrid rendering > time. The other option which has already been mentioned would be to do > it server side. You could also roll this into AIR and use the built in > SQL Lite implementation for added ease and speed. > > -- William > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "letterpigeon" <ban.luc@> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > Thanks for all your responses. Maybe it'll be better if I described > > our use case in bit more in details. Our users send us trade file > > (sometimes has ~50K trades in it currently). And let say all of the > > trades have an invalid broker code, and all got kicked out, the user > > will have to go in and change the broker code 1 by 1 & that could take > > them hours. Therefore, the ability for our users to perform mass > > actions on the dataset (either client side or server side) would be a > > huge win for us. > > > > Once again, thanks all. > > > > Ban > > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "hank williams" <hank777@> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2007 4:35 AM, Tom Chiverton <tom.chiverton@> wrote: > > > > > > > On Friday 09 Nov 2007, letterpigeon wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > requirement is for the grid to be able to support up to 100K+ or > > even > > > > > 1 million rows > > > > > > > > Why ? It's utterly impossible for a user to cope with this much > > data at > > > > once, > > > > so what's the point ? > > > > > > > > > > In general, the question of where to process data is totally legit. > > If you > > > read carefully, he did not say he wanted to *show* 100k rows at > once. He > > > said he wanted to be able to do mass operations on it on the client > > side. > > > Without understanding his application and architecture I cannot > opine on > > > whether it is better to do this on the client or server. But the > > idea, in > > > applications that may need to scale, of doing more work on the > > client, is a > > > good one. If you have lots of clients you can indeed save money on > > server > > > costs by having the clients help with the work. > > > > > > Hank > > > > > >
