3 ms·
Its still pretty nuts today. You would never try to display million of records like that without some kind of pagination mechanism. Its not even a useful view t
by a_humean 4y ago
Its still pretty nuts today. You would never try to display million of records like that without some kind of pagination mechanism. Its not even a useful view to for humans to view that much data at that level of detail all at once.
- jesboat 4y agoThere's at least one example on this thread so far of an actual web dev hitting this on a not-small website causing bugs for an actual user. With a 30px record size, it's only ~600k records, which really doesn't seem that unreasonable to me
- incrudible 4y agoI think that is completely wrong, scrolling through thousands or even millions of records is vastly more usable than clicking through pages. Of course you do not load millions of records into RAM, just the ones that cross the view bounds.