R
rene7705
Flightless Bird
I've built this little dataviewer
http://mediabeez.ws/htmlMicroscope/
http://code.google.com/p/htmlmicroscope/downloads/list
It allows you to view big programming-language-level arrays in the browser
efficiently.
but as it turns out, browsers are badly misbehaving on xxl datasets.
the problem in a nutshell is that the easiest way i can solve a problem of
making 40+ meg software arrays, encoded from the server into something like
this
<div style="display:none;"><!-- [40 meg+ data] --></div>
I then want to scan through that data using js .innerHTML.substr() on the div.
Back in programming class, they explained how any .substr() should be able
to fetch small pieces of very large strings.
So here's your "challenge". I want to be able to put up to 1 gigabyte of
data in my commented-out hidden-div, and scan through it 1kb - 10kb as fast
as possible.
Once i'm done building up the DOM for it (semi-recursively, with plenty of
..setTimeout()s), i want to free the memory of the original data (so delete
the hidden div).
Lets face it, lost of ordinary computers (esp those of developers) are at 2
to 4 gig, leaving at least 1 gig free to the browser.
My current test at 40meg of hidden data, ie8 / winxp, 2 gig memory,
a) .getElementById ('validID').innerHTML = 'shortString';
does not work anymore on such a page.
b) the "developer tools" are a long-overdue good improvement, but they tend
to freeze up my system even just looking at the console, doing nothing else
on a page like that.
a+b![:]]( "Smile :]")
i dont have a way to even check if your .innerHTML.substr even works
let alone at what speed.
btw; ff/ubuntu = about 700ms/call, ff/windows about 150ms (still way to slow
when asking for just 100 bytes per call eh)
and chrome has no console.log/trace and like IE (and all FFs) refuses to
update another div's.innerHTML with even a short string.
c) btw, did you think to implement console.trace()?
it should return a full js function trace with full parameter content per
function call.
hope you can do something about these boundaries
----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.
http://www.microsoft.com/communitie...&dg=microsoft.public.internetexplorer.general
http://mediabeez.ws/htmlMicroscope/
http://code.google.com/p/htmlmicroscope/downloads/list
It allows you to view big programming-language-level arrays in the browser
efficiently.
but as it turns out, browsers are badly misbehaving on xxl datasets.
the problem in a nutshell is that the easiest way i can solve a problem of
making 40+ meg software arrays, encoded from the server into something like
this
<div style="display:none;"><!-- [40 meg+ data] --></div>
I then want to scan through that data using js .innerHTML.substr() on the div.
Back in programming class, they explained how any .substr() should be able
to fetch small pieces of very large strings.
So here's your "challenge". I want to be able to put up to 1 gigabyte of
data in my commented-out hidden-div, and scan through it 1kb - 10kb as fast
as possible.
Once i'm done building up the DOM for it (semi-recursively, with plenty of
..setTimeout()s), i want to free the memory of the original data (so delete
the hidden div).
Lets face it, lost of ordinary computers (esp those of developers) are at 2
to 4 gig, leaving at least 1 gig free to the browser.
My current test at 40meg of hidden data, ie8 / winxp, 2 gig memory,
a) .getElementById ('validID').innerHTML = 'shortString';
does not work anymore on such a page.
b) the "developer tools" are a long-overdue good improvement, but they tend
to freeze up my system even just looking at the console, doing nothing else
on a page like that.
a+b
i dont have a way to even check if your .innerHTML.substr even workslet alone at what speed.
btw; ff/ubuntu = about 700ms/call, ff/windows about 150ms (still way to slow
when asking for just 100 bytes per call eh)
and chrome has no console.log/trace and like IE (and all FFs) refuses to
update another div's.innerHTML with even a short string.
c) btw, did you think to implement console.trace()?
it should return a full js function trace with full parameter content per
function call.
hope you can do something about these boundaries
----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.
http://www.microsoft.com/communitie...&dg=microsoft.public.internetexplorer.general