[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kfm-devel
Subject:    Re: Table rendering problem, feature or normal ?
From:       Vadim Plessky <lucy-ples () mtu-net ! ru>
Date:       2001-11-24 14:18:35
[Download RAW message or body]

On Saturday 24 November 2001 13:10, Joseph Wenninger wrote:
|   > |   I know it should be  done with one table instead of many (perhaps
|   > | rendering speed up on some browsers), but I found this kind of code
|   > | in some webapplications we use at work and it only seems to break in
|   > | konqy.
|   >
|   > As I said, it's also broken in Opera5.
|
|   If I remember correcly, another developer told me, that large tables are
| slow, that's why he made each line a table (in the real website, there are
| about 50 lines)

I just wondering who it could be.
50 lines (or 50 tables) is *absolutely no problem* for Konqueror/KHTML.
So if possible - use just one table with 50 rows (or workarounds I proposed), 
and select width="50%" for TD just in first row (it's not necessary to select 
width  for every row, as only first row is counted!) 

|
|   > Rendering of tables in Konqueror seems pretty fast for me.
|   > What kind of hardware do you use?
|   > (if you run Mozilla, I guess you have at least 64MB of RAM, am I
|   > correct?)
|
|   128 / 192 MB Ram, Celeron 700 / 500

Than it's strange, as I have CPU of appx. same speed (Pentium III/600 and 
128MB of RAM). And I really don't have a problem with tables & Konq.

|
|   > My stress-test examples show that Mozilla is slower on tables than
|   > Konq, while IE is faster. Let me know if you are interested to see
|   > those testcases.
|
|   It would be nice, If you could send me those stresstest files.
|
|   Kind regards
|   Joseph Wenninger

Ok, pls consider attached example (testcase-LongHTML_4.html)

it executes following JS code
for (i=0; i < 600 ; i++)
{
  document.writeln("<P><IMG SRC='ice_forest.gif'> <A HREF='font.zip'>Image no 
" + i + "</A></P>");
}
and in return you will get 600 images on one page ;-)
I attach image which I used to this mail as well - it's rather small, 14K.

Time difference (as reported in dialog box after execution)
Konqueror: 2550
     on reload: 2525
Opera5: 5223
     on reload: 4880
Mozilla 0.9.5: 2233 
     on reload: 2463
   (but images not diplayed! they will be displayed only when you hit "ok" 
button in dialog box, so it's not 100% comparable to Konq and Opera) 

You may want to remove IMG tag from JavaScript above and test jsut <P> tags, 
or replace <P> with DIV - so you will get idea what's Konqueror 
parsing/rendering speed about.
I guess you should increase counter from 600 to 100000, otherwise results 
will be meaningless. :-)) 
-- 

Vadim Plessky
http://kde2.newmail.ru  (English)
33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE
http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html
KDE mini-Themes
http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/

["testcase_LongHTML_4.html" (text/html)]

<HTML>
<HEAD><TITLE>Test for Long HTML files</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<H2>This image, Ice Forest, will be displayed below 600 times.</H2>
<IMG SRC="ice_forest.gif" WIDTH="150" HEIGHT="100" BORDER="0" ALT="">
<P>START...</P>

<SCRIPT language=JavaScript>
<!--
timestamp = new Date ();
var sec1, sec2, ms1, ms2, ms, tim1, tim2, timdif;
 tim1 = (timestamp.getTime());
 sec1 = timestamp.getSeconds();
 ms1 = timestamp.getMilliseconds();

document.writeln("<H2>");
for (i=0; i < 600 ; i++)
{
  document.writeln("<P><IMG SRC='ice_forest.gif'> <A HREF='font.zip'>Image no " + i + "</A></P>");
}
document.writeln("</H2>");

timestamp = new Date ();
 tim2 = (timestamp.getTime());
timdif = tim2-tim1;
 sec2 = timestamp.getSeconds();
ms2 = timestamp.getMilliseconds();

if (sec1=sec2)
 { ms = ms2-ms1; }
else
 { ms = (sec2-sec1)*1000 + ms2 -ms1; };

// alert("sec1 ="+sec1+" sec2= "+sec2);

alert("time difference: "+timdif+"; - ms: "+ms);

//-->
</SCRIPT>
</BODY>

</HTML>
["ice_forest.gif" (image/gif)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic