Re: Glom 0.9.1?

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 17:28 -0500, Greg Breland wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 15:35, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > Yes, I noticed this too. I'll try to fix it soon, though I'm away until
> > the 12th. Of course anyone should feel free to try fixing that in the
> > meantime. By the way, I'd rather add the row directly to the list model
> > instead of refreshing the whole list view.
>
>
> I disagree for following reasons:
>
> 1) More complex than simply refreshing the list view.  You have to
> figure out where in the grid to place the row based on sorting, etc.
>
> 2) Refreshing the entire list will freshen the data in case other rows
> have been changed by other users.
>
> 3) Premature optimization.  By my tests, clearing and rebuilding a 64K
> row data grid takes less than one second on my 1.6ghz machine.  So any
> slowdown is in the DB round trip, which you have to do for the one
> record anyway in case space aliens stole the data on the way to the
> server or something.  Basically for grids less than 10k records, I would
> be amazed if there is any perceptible speed difference between the two
> methods other than maybe more flicker when refreshing the entire grid.

Note that Glom should in theory get rows on-demand, only getting row
data for records that are visible in the list. But I haven't tested it
with large amounts of records yet.

In summary, yeah, you're right. Thanks.

We probably do want to make sure that the new record's row is visible
when switching to list view.

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com