3 ms·
same question. if it works well, i'll definitely use it instead of my own frankenstein hackery EDIT: seems like no go: 500 rows take ~10sec to render http://j
by micaeked 14y ago
same question. if it works well, i'll definitely use it instead of my own frankenstein hackery
EDIT: seems like no go: 500 rows take ~10sec to render
http://jsfiddle.net/JKg33/ http://jsfiddle.net/JKg33/
caution: will freeze firefox while rendering
- warpech 14y agoI am the dev of the plugin. Thanks for the info, I will try to address that. Notice that the performance is much better when you turn off row/col headers. rowHeaders: false, colHeaders: false, Example: http://jsfiddle.net/JKg33/2/ http://jsfiddle.net/JKg33/2/ That is the newest feature and I am sure it can be optimised. It would be the best if you could help me with the plugin by issueing a ticket in GitHub. I do this for my own startup (www.giraffeapp.com) and I have to split time between this and other tasks.
- k3n 14y agoThe best way I've seen this problem solved is via using a viewport, where you only render what is visible at the time. SlickGrid does this very well, but they don't have the Excel-like features that biz people fawn over.
- colinm 14y agoNeat! FYI: "minSpareRows: 0" doesn't work as expected. (Still shows 1 spare row.
- gouranga 14y agoEditing row 500 in chrome melts it as well...
- warpech 14y agoUPDATE: I have just made some optimizations for large grids. Please try again the same fiddle now (clear your cache) http://jsfiddle.net/JKg33/ http://jsfiddle.net/JKg33/ Still there is some work to be done but it is much faster now.