Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #23715

Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable

Path	csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx05.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable
Date	Mon, 29 Apr 2013 08:41:34 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	28
Message-ID	<kllpju$pti$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<c4c87a08-569b-49d9-906b-9bf2f3f2df65@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
Injection-Date	Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:38:22 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info	mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0d73d8cc209bff1c6395088b400d0605"; logging-data="26546"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18cbAAZ0mrdusROocW+sBGV"
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
In-Reply-To	<c4c87a08-569b-49d9-906b-9bf2f3f2df65@googlegroups.com>
Cancel-Lock	sha1:KxJHg0xNK6/e5emVq64DH1ej+3I=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:23715

Show key headers only | View raw

On 4/29/2013 8:13 AM, clusardi2k@aol.com wrote:
> If I have a JTable with a lot of colors, and if the application deletes and then adds columns to it will the performance degrade if I go from a 30 X 30 table to a 1000 X 100 table, please explain.

     If you're being reasonably careful,[*] the performance
shouldn't be bad.  Remember, only the visible portion of the
table needs painting,[**] so only the visible cells' values
need to be retrieved and rendered.  Off-screen areas won't
affect the performance much.

     Using many -- or few -- colors should make no measurable
difference.

     [*] For example, firing "minimal" change events.  If your
model changes one cell's value and then says "The world has
changed," the table will spend time refreshing all the cells
that didn't change, too.  Fire events that describe the actual
changes as particularly as possible.

     [**] If you're displaying all 100,000 cells simultaneously,
you either (1) have a truly enormous screen or (2) have made
all the cells so tiny they can't show much information.  My
1920x1080 display could devote fewer than 21 pixels to each of
100,000 cells, fewer pixels than a mouse pointer uses -- and
that's not counting borders, window decorations, ...

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid

Thread

Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable clusardi2k@aol.com - 2013-04-29 05:13 -0700
  Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-04-29 08:41 -0400
  Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-04-29 08:26 -0700
    Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-04-29 12:01 -0400
      Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-04-29 13:09 -0700
        Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-04-29 16:52 -0400
      Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable clusardi2k@aol.com - 2013-05-01 12:41 -0700
        Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-05-01 17:52 -0400
        Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-05-02 01:57 -0400
  Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-04-29 19:39 +0200
  Re: Efficiency/Reliablility of Scaled Up JTable Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-05-01 10:15 -0700

csiph-web