You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@wicket.apache.org by Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com> on 2008/06/03 12:57:56 UTC
AJAX slower than full page update
Hi
I have observed that using AJAX to update of large content of a page is much
slower than
updating the full page withou AJAX. For example AJAX sorting a big DataTable
(10x25) can be much slower that without AJAX, and I often see "Client
parsetime" of more than a second in IE.
FireFox seems to be faster, so I am hoping that is is possible to optimize
the Wicket AJAX Javascript.
Is this somthing that you Wicket developers will look into?
Best Regards
Niels
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17620961.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: AJAX slower than full page update
Posted by "Keith R. Bennett" <kb...@bbsinc.biz>.
I too am experiencing extremely slow performance on IE.
I just did a test on an Ajax call on IE, Firefox, and Opera, running on the
same machine running Windows.
Here are the results, in seconds:
2.4: IE
0.7: Firefox
0.6: Opera
I'm doing nothing fancy, but there is a data table (about 12 columns,
variable number of rows, say 10-20). We could perhaps do a page udpate
rather than an Ajax call, but then would lose the position on the page.
Any clue as to why, and how to fix it? The client is committed to IE
unfortunately so we can't just tell them to dump it.
- Keith
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p27990814.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: AJAX slower than full page update
Posted by Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com>.
hmm..ok, then it must be something in my application...
And is was. My table contains lots of small icons, that are not really
cached in development mode.
The time shown as "client parsetime" then includes the time to call the
server maybe 50 times to check if all the icons are up to date, and
switching to deployment mode made a very big difference.
So thanks for the help!
Niels
igor.vaynberg wrote:
>
> honestly i havent noticed any slow performance on ie...
>
> -igor
>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, but we have many other things on the page.
>>
>> But why is it so slow? Is Wicket using some js functions that is extra
>> slow
>> in IE?
>>
>> If you google for "IE javascript performance" there are some
>> recommendations, like here:
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/08/28/728654.aspx IE + JavaScript
>> Performance Recommendations - Part 1
>>
>> Have anyone looked at this "issue" before?
>>
>> BR
>> Niels
>>
>>
>> igor.vaynberg wrote:
>>>
>>> if the table is the only expensive component on your page then there
>>> is really no advantage to using ajax since you are adding all the
>>> overhead of javascript processing without saving anything.
>>>
>>> -igor
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I have observed that using AJAX to update of large content of a page is
>>>> much
>>>> slower than
>>>> updating the full page withou AJAX. For example AJAX sorting a big
>>>> DataTable
>>>> (10x25) can be much slower that without AJAX, and I often see "Client
>>>> parsetime" of more than a second in IE.
>>>> FireFox seems to be faster, so I am hoping that is is possible to
>>>> optimize
>>>> the Wicket AJAX Javascript.
>>>>
>>>> Is this somthing that you Wicket developers will look into?
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards
>>>> Niels
>>>> --
>>>> View this message in context:
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17620961.html
>>>> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17653337.html
>> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17655546.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: AJAX slower than full page update
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
honestly i havent noticed any slow performance on ie...
-igor
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, but we have many other things on the page.
>
> But why is it so slow? Is Wicket using some js functions that is extra slow
> in IE?
>
> If you google for "IE javascript performance" there are some
> recommendations, like here:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/08/28/728654.aspx IE + JavaScript
> Performance Recommendations - Part 1
>
> Have anyone looked at this "issue" before?
>
> BR
> Niels
>
>
> igor.vaynberg wrote:
>>
>> if the table is the only expensive component on your page then there
>> is really no advantage to using ajax since you are adding all the
>> overhead of javascript processing without saving anything.
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I have observed that using AJAX to update of large content of a page is
>>> much
>>> slower than
>>> updating the full page withou AJAX. For example AJAX sorting a big
>>> DataTable
>>> (10x25) can be much slower that without AJAX, and I often see "Client
>>> parsetime" of more than a second in IE.
>>> FireFox seems to be faster, so I am hoping that is is possible to
>>> optimize
>>> the Wicket AJAX Javascript.
>>>
>>> Is this somthing that you Wicket developers will look into?
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Niels
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17620961.html
>>> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17653337.html
> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: AJAX slower than full page update
Posted by Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com>.
Yes, but we have many other things on the page.
But why is it so slow? Is Wicket using some js functions that is extra slow
in IE?
If you google for "IE javascript performance" there are some
recommendations, like here:
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/08/28/728654.aspx IE + JavaScript
Performance Recommendations - Part 1
Have anyone looked at this "issue" before?
BR
Niels
igor.vaynberg wrote:
>
> if the table is the only expensive component on your page then there
> is really no advantage to using ajax since you are adding all the
> overhead of javascript processing without saving anything.
>
> -igor
>
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I have observed that using AJAX to update of large content of a page is
>> much
>> slower than
>> updating the full page withou AJAX. For example AJAX sorting a big
>> DataTable
>> (10x25) can be much slower that without AJAX, and I often see "Client
>> parsetime" of more than a second in IE.
>> FireFox seems to be faster, so I am hoping that is is possible to
>> optimize
>> the Wicket AJAX Javascript.
>>
>> Is this somthing that you Wicket developers will look into?
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Niels
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17620961.html
>> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17653337.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: AJAX slower than full page update
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
if the table is the only expensive component on your page then there
is really no advantage to using ajax since you are adding all the
overhead of javascript processing without saving anything.
-igor
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Niels Bo <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I have observed that using AJAX to update of large content of a page is much
> slower than
> updating the full page withou AJAX. For example AJAX sorting a big DataTable
> (10x25) can be much slower that without AJAX, and I often see "Client
> parsetime" of more than a second in IE.
> FireFox seems to be faster, so I am hoping that is is possible to optimize
> the Wicket AJAX Javascript.
>
> Is this somthing that you Wicket developers will look into?
>
> Best Regards
> Niels
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/AJAX-slower-than-full-page-update-tp17620961p17620961.html
> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org