By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,851 Members | 1,047 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,851 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

can ASP table display 200 columns, 500,000 rows?

P: n/a
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data. But I have been pulling data from a
Lotus Notes database into Sql Server for a while now, but
Lotus Notes is starting to crack, columns getting
corrupted. Can't handle the volume of data and number of
columns. Sql Server has no problem. But displaying the
data is the big deal. The end users want to be able to
scroll acros a page to the colum of their choice, or be
able to scroll up or down. I was thinking of breaking up
the table into section, but this would reqire additional
clicking to get to the next section of the table. Would
it be feasable to have a 200 column table in asp? or
should I stick with the section idea? I have to tell my
dept something. They started out with Lotus Notes but
couldn't query the data. I have been suggesting to
migrate the project entirely to Sql Server/IIS. Notes can
at least display all the columns. Suggestions appreciated.

Thanks,
Rich
Jul 19 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
32 Replies


P: n/a
I'd say it's just a matter of personal preference after considering the
drawbacks of having that large or a response and putting that extra strain
on the server. When you want a drink of water, do you fill a glass and take
that with you back to your sofa, or do you pick up the entire river and try
to lug that back to your sofa?

Ray at work

"Rich" <an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:cf****************************@phx.gbl...
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data. But I have been pulling data from a
Lotus Notes database into Sql Server for a while now, but
Lotus Notes is starting to crack, columns getting
corrupted. Can't handle the volume of data and number of
columns. Sql Server has no problem. But displaying the
data is the big deal. The end users want to be able to
scroll acros a page to the colum of their choice, or be
able to scroll up or down. I was thinking of breaking up
the table into section, but this would reqire additional
clicking to get to the next section of the table. Would
it be feasable to have a 200 column table in asp? or
should I stick with the section idea? I have to tell my
dept something. They started out with Lotus Notes but
couldn't query the data. I have been suggesting to
migrate the project entirely to Sql Server/IIS. Notes can
at least display all the columns. Suggestions appreciated.

Thanks,
Rich

Jul 19 '05 #2

P: n/a
Rich wrote:
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data. But I have been pulling data from a
Lotus Notes database into Sql Server for a while now, but
Lotus Notes is starting to crack, columns getting
corrupted. Can't handle the volume of data and number of
columns. Sql Server has no problem. But displaying the
data is the big deal. The end users want to be able to
scroll acros a page to the colum of their choice, or be
able to scroll up or down. I was thinking of breaking up
the table into section, but this would reqire additional
clicking to get to the next section of the table. Would
it be feasable to have a 200 column table in asp? or
should I stick with the section idea? I have to tell my
dept something. They started out with Lotus Notes but
couldn't query the data. I have been suggesting to
migrate the project entirely to Sql Server/IIS. Notes can
at least display all the columns. Suggestions appreciated.

Thanks,
Rich


I like the "section" idea. The user would have to click something anyways to
do the scroll. What difference if they click a scrollbar or a button?

You might be able to sell it by giving them a dropdown of column names -
when they select one, it will display the appropriate "section"

I would be very leary of trying to stream 500,000 rows to a the client in
one fell swoop.It's kind of ridiculous, don't you think? How is having that
many rows on the screen at one time of any use to anyone?

Bob Barrows

--
Microsoft MVP -- ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. The email account listed in my From
header is my spam trap, so I don't check it very often. You will get a
quicker response by posting to the newsgroup.
Jul 19 '05 #3

P: n/a
"Rich" <an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:cf****************************@phx.gbl...
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data.


You Betcha!!

Just consider the HTML needed to display it:

"<table>", plus
500,000 lots of "<tr>" with
200 lots of "<td>" and "</td>" within that, plus
500,000 lots of "</tr>", plus the final
"</table>"

that's:

7 + 500,000 * ( 4 + 200 * ( 4 + 5 ) + 5 ) + 8 bytes
= 904,500,015 bytes
~= 0.83 Gigabytes!!

and that's without *any* actual data in it!!

Transmission time: (not counting /building/ it on the server)

100Mbit ethernet 72 seconds
56Kbit modem: just shy of 36 hours.

Not quite in Our Friends in Redmond's league - just under seven
*days* for the /single-file/ download of Visual Studio 2003 - but
getting there... ;-)

Regards,
Phill W.

and yes; I'm /very/ familiar with dial-up download times... :-(
Jul 19 '05 #4

P: n/a
> I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data.


Why would you subject a user to this cruel torture?

--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
Jul 19 '05 #5

P: n/a
Is the data static or does it differ from one user to the next (or from one
query to the next)?
Is this on an intranet where the clients could have direct access to the
SQLServer database?
Which browsers must be supported? Can you limit support to a particular
browser?

--
Mark Schupp
Head of Development
Integrity eLearning
www.ielearning.com
"Rich" <an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:cf****************************@phx.gbl...
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data. But I have been pulling data from a
Lotus Notes database into Sql Server for a while now, but
Lotus Notes is starting to crack, columns getting
corrupted. Can't handle the volume of data and number of
columns. Sql Server has no problem. But displaying the
data is the big deal. The end users want to be able to
scroll acros a page to the colum of their choice, or be
able to scroll up or down. I was thinking of breaking up
the table into section, but this would reqire additional
clicking to get to the next section of the table. Would
it be feasable to have a 200 column table in asp? or
should I stick with the section idea? I have to tell my
dept something. They started out with Lotus Notes but
couldn't query the data. I have been suggesting to
migrate the project entirely to Sql Server/IIS. Notes can
at least display all the columns. Suggestions appreciated.

Thanks,
Rich

Jul 19 '05 #6

P: n/a
Thank you all for your replies. I guess I will go with
the section idea. And the suggestion for the dropdown box
listing all the columns is real cool too. Matter of fact,
I tried out Bob's ListDemo sample for the dropdown
listbox. works great!

Thanks again for all the suggestions.

Rich
-----Original Message-----
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data. But I have been pulling data from aLotus Notes database into Sql Server for a while now, but
Lotus Notes is starting to crack, columns getting
corrupted. Can't handle the volume of data and number of
columns. Sql Server has no problem. But displaying the
data is the big deal. The end users want to be able to
scroll acros a page to the colum of their choice, or be
able to scroll up or down. I was thinking of breaking up
the table into section, but this would reqire additional
clicking to get to the next section of the table. Would
it be feasable to have a 200 column table in asp? or
should I stick with the section idea? I have to tell my
dept something. They started out with Lotus Notes but
couldn't query the data. I have been suggesting to
migrate the project entirely to Sql Server/IIS. Notes canat least display all the columns. Suggestions appreciated.
Thanks,
Rich
.

Jul 19 '05 #7

P: n/a
Not to mention the time the browser would need to actually display that
page, even after it's downloaded ! I had a client insist on being able to
view a huge table like that. The page size with full data came to over 500
mb. Took more time for the browser to parse and display it on the local
side than it took to download it from the server over a fast T1 connection.
"Phill. W" <P.A.Ward@o-p-e-n-.-a-c-.-u-k> wrote in message
news:bq**********@yarrow.open.ac.uk...
"Rich" <an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:cf****************************@phx.gbl...
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data.


You Betcha!!

Just consider the HTML needed to display it:

"<table>", plus
500,000 lots of "<tr>" with
200 lots of "<td>" and "</td>" within that, plus
500,000 lots of "</tr>", plus the final
"</table>"

that's:

7 + 500,000 * ( 4 + 200 * ( 4 + 5 ) + 5 ) + 8 bytes
= 904,500,015 bytes
~= 0.83 Gigabytes!!

and that's without *any* actual data in it!!

Transmission time: (not counting /building/ it on the server)

100Mbit ethernet 72 seconds
56Kbit modem: just shy of 36 hours.

Not quite in Our Friends in Redmond's league - just under seven
*days* for the /single-file/ download of Visual Studio 2003 - but
getting there... ;-)

Regards,
Phill W.

and yes; I'm /very/ familiar with dial-up download times... :-(

Jul 19 '05 #8

P: n/a
Because Lotus Notes was able to do this with up to like
400,000 recs. But now starting to fail. Thus, I started
pushing ASP. Each record has a Datefield I could filter
by or an alphanumeric ID. I guess we don't really need to
display all 500,000 recs at once. Just that even though
Notes could sort of do it (Notes 5) it doesn't really have
built in filtering. So you get the whole thing. People
kinda got used to that. I guess I need to push - that
with Sql Server and ASP you can actually filter stuff and
not have to deal with the whole potatoe at once.
-----Original Message-----
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and 500,000 rows of data.


Why would you subject a user to this cruel torture?

--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
.

Jul 19 '05 #9

P: n/a
Yes, this data is on an intranet, and yes, I could hook
the intended audience up with ms Access to view the data
or custom apps, but for data entry (large company, over
130,000 employees) we have people entering data all over
the place. Right now everyone (for this project) uses
Lotus Notes for data entry and viewing (although I pull
the data in to Sql Server daily from Notes for creating
reports). You have the one Notes app which is accessible
anywhere within the company intranet. I'm thinking why
not migrate this straight to ASP/Sql Server, then I don't
have to pull in any data from Notes. And with ASP only
need the one app. Much easier to maintain than a bunch of
custom apps distributed all over the place.
-----Original Message-----
Is the data static or does it differ from one user to the next (or from onequery to the next)?
Is this on an intranet where the clients could have direct access to theSQLServer database?
Which browsers must be supported? Can you limit support to a particularbrowser?

--
Mark Schupp
Head of Development
Integrity eLearning
www.ielearning.com
"Rich" <an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messagenews:cf****************************@phx.gbl...
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and 500,000 rows of data. But I have been pulling data from a Lotus Notes database into Sql Server for a while now, but Lotus Notes is starting to crack, columns getting
corrupted. Can't handle the volume of data and number of columns. Sql Server has no problem. But displaying the
data is the big deal. The end users want to be able to
scroll acros a page to the colum of their choice, or be
able to scroll up or down. I was thinking of breaking up the table into section, but this would reqire additional
clicking to get to the next section of the table. Would
it be feasable to have a 200 column table in asp? or
should I stick with the section idea? I have to tell my
dept something. They started out with Lotus Notes but
couldn't query the data. I have been suggesting to
migrate the project entirely to Sql Server/IIS. Notes can at least display all the columns. Suggestions appreciated.
Thanks,
Rich

.

Jul 19 '05 #10

P: n/a
> Because Lotus Notes was able to do this with up to like
400,000 recs. But now starting to fail.


Whether you're using Lotus Notes, or ASP, or ColdFusion, or Flash, or a
mainframe, or a stone tablet... 400,000 rows is WAY too many for any human
to handle (never mind the actual technological limitations outlined by
others). Imagine hitting a web page that had 400,000 rows in a table. Does
it really sound fun? This is why when you search for things on the web, or
on google, they present (by default) 10 items per page, not 100,000. If you
get too many results, you can simply narrow down your search. This is the
angle you should be approaching from, in my opinion, rather than asking,
"how can I still force them to look at 500,000 rows at once!?!?!?"

--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
Jul 19 '05 #11

P: n/a
The biggest element/obstacle for me is the human element.
I write code. Not much for shmoozing. My company
(supposedly the largest hmo in US) has been around for
quite a while and has not focused as much energy on
computer tech. So I was one just a few techy types to
join on. These are hard people to sell on new technology
(heck, the stuff I'm trying to push is already 5+ years
old - wait till I start pushing VS.net).

Lotus Notes has been the mainstay here for quite a few
years. They are comfortable with it and it's
limitations. If they plan on keeping up with/or ahead of
the competition they will eventually have to step up to
newer technology.

I had to do the biggest song and dance just to get them to
use Sql Server for reporting. Before, they were using
Access (1 gig limit) at 110% of capacity - Access kept
dying. Now using sql Server (only 6 gigs of data) we are
at 0.6% of capacity and reports run smooth and quick. So
for my next trick, I need to convince them that IIS is way
more suited for their needs than Domino (notes server)
since all the data ends up in Microsoft based reports.
Keep everything in its native element.

-----Original Message-----
Because Lotus Notes was able to do this with up to like
400,000 recs. But now starting to fail.
Whether you're using Lotus Notes, or ASP, or ColdFusion,

or Flash, or amainframe, or a stone tablet... 400,000 rows is WAY too many for any humanto handle (never mind the actual technological limitations outlined byothers). Imagine hitting a web page that had 400,000 rows in a table. Doesit really sound fun? This is why when you search for things on the web, oron google, they present (by default) 10 items per page, not 100,000. If youget too many results, you can simply narrow down your search. This is theangle you should be approaching from, in my opinion, rather than asking,"how can I still force them to look at 500,000 rows at once!?!?!?"
--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
.

Jul 19 '05 #12

P: n/a
Ray,

Wouldn't it make more sense to move the sofa to the river?

Sorry, I couldn't resist!

:)

John
-----Original Message-----
I'd say it's just a matter of personal preference after considering thedrawbacks of having that large or a response and putting that extra strainon the server. When you want a drink of water, do you fill a glass and takethat with you back to your sofa, or do you pick up the entire river and tryto lug that back to your sofa?

Ray at work


Jul 19 '05 #13

P: n/a
Ha! Maybe. But then you'd have to move the TV, the receiver, the TiVo, the
speakers, the cats, etc.

Ray at work

"John Beschler" <gi***@geewhiz.com> wrote in message
news:03****************************@phx.gbl...
Ray,

Wouldn't it make more sense to move the sofa to the river?

Sorry, I couldn't resist!

:)

John
-----Original Message-----
I'd say it's just a matter of personal preference after

considering the
drawbacks of having that large or a response and putting

that extra strain
on the server. When you want a drink of water, do you

fill a glass and take
that with you back to your sofa, or do you pick up the

entire river and try
to lug that back to your sofa?

Ray at work

Jul 19 '05 #14

P: n/a
The problem you are going to see with ASP is that when the user scrolls
their view (horizontally or vertically) it will not scroll smoothly (as I
assume the Lotus Notes app does). The view will jump to the next display
area after a pause while the page is generated. If this is acceptable then
have a look at some of the "record paging" approaches on the ASP sites
(www.aspfaq.com, www.asp101.com etc).

If the users expect smooth scrolling and are on the network where they could
connect to the database with a traditional client-server application you
might want to look into building a VB application with a grid control of
some kind in it.

--
Mark Schupp
Head of Development
Integrity eLearning
www.ielearning.com
"Rich" <an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:d1****************************@phx.gbl...
Yes, this data is on an intranet, and yes, I could hook
the intended audience up with ms Access to view the data
or custom apps, but for data entry (large company, over
130,000 employees) we have people entering data all over
the place. Right now everyone (for this project) uses
Lotus Notes for data entry and viewing (although I pull
the data in to Sql Server daily from Notes for creating
reports). You have the one Notes app which is accessible
anywhere within the company intranet. I'm thinking why
not migrate this straight to ASP/Sql Server, then I don't
have to pull in any data from Notes. And with ASP only
need the one app. Much easier to maintain than a bunch of
custom apps distributed all over the place.
-----Original Message-----
Is the data static or does it differ from one user to the

next (or from one
query to the next)?
Is this on an intranet where the clients could have

direct access to the
SQLServer database?
Which browsers must be supported? Can you limit support

to a particular
browser?

--
Mark Schupp
Head of Development
Integrity eLearning
www.ielearning.com
"Rich" <an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in

message
news:cf****************************@phx.gbl...
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and 500,000 rows of data. But I have been pulling data from a Lotus Notes database into Sql Server for a while now, but Lotus Notes is starting to crack, columns getting
corrupted. Can't handle the volume of data and number of columns. Sql Server has no problem. But displaying the
data is the big deal. The end users want to be able to
scroll acros a page to the colum of their choice, or be
able to scroll up or down. I was thinking of breaking up the table into section, but this would reqire additional
clicking to get to the next section of the table. Would
it be feasable to have a 200 column table in asp? or
should I stick with the section idea? I have to tell my
dept something. They started out with Lotus Notes but
couldn't query the data. I have been suggesting to
migrate the project entirely to Sql Server/IIS. Notes can at least display all the columns. Suggestions appreciated.
Thanks,
Rich

.

Jul 19 '05 #15

P: n/a
"Mark Schupp" <ms*****@ielearning.com> wrote:
The problem you are going to see with ASP is that when the user scrolls
their view (horizontally or vertically) it will not scroll smoothly (as I
assume the Lotus Notes app does). The view will jump to the next display
area after a pause while the page is generated.


That would have NOTHING to do with ASP!!!! The ASP code runs on the
server. Once that ends, the HTML it generates is sent to the client,
where it's rendered on the screen. Scrolling happens on the client,
and it's up to the client whether it scrolls smoothly or jumpily. ASP
has finished its job by the time you see that problem.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(DTS)
Sl********@bls.gov
Jul 19 '05 #16

P: n/a
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 08:37:06 -0800, "Rich"
<an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data. But I have been pulling data from a
Lotus Notes database into Sql Server for a while now, but
Lotus Notes is starting to crack, columns getting
corrupted. Can't handle the volume of data and number of
columns. Sql Server has no problem. But displaying the
data is the big deal. The end users want to be able to
scroll acros a page to the colum of their choice, or be
able to scroll up or down.


Why not use a combination of SQL views, along with some method of
allowing the user to select the columns seen and the range of rows
returned. What you describe is like a user looking at a phone book
for the information they need. What you really want to give them is a
search interface so you don't need to display the entire phone book,
just the data in it that meets what the user is looking for.

Jeff
Jul 19 '05 #17

P: n/a
Obviously true, but I think he's referring to a scenario where the browser
makes a trip to the server when the data is scrolled out of the window.
Back in the old days we used to call this 'paging'.

"Tim Slattery" <Sl********@bls.gov> wrote in message
news:ae********************************@4ax.com...
"Mark Schupp" <ms*****@ielearning.com> wrote:
The problem you are going to see with ASP is that when the user scrolls
their view (horizontally or vertically) it will not scroll smoothly (as I
assume the Lotus Notes app does). The view will jump to the next display
area after a pause while the page is generated.


That would have NOTHING to do with ASP!!!! The ASP code runs on the
server. Once that ends, the HTML it generates is sent to the client,
where it's rendered on the screen. Scrolling happens on the client,
and it's up to the client whether it scrolls smoothly or jumpily. ASP
has finished its job by the time you see that problem.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(DTS)
Sl********@bls.gov

Jul 19 '05 #18

P: n/a
What I was referring to was that, unless all 200 columns (500,000 rows each)
are loaded into a single page then "scrolling" will involve returning to the
server for more data. This introduces the "jump" in the display.

There are probably ways to use remote-scripting and JavaScript to do this
smoothly but (in my highly biased opinion) web-browsers and ASP were never
intended to simulate the Notes application described by the original post (I
could be wrong about how the Notes application displays data of course, it
may already be "jumpy" in which case the ASP application could simulate it
fairly well).

--
Mark Schupp
Head of Development
Integrity eLearning
www.ielearning.com
"Tim Slattery" <Sl********@bls.gov> wrote in message
news:ae********************************@4ax.com...
"Mark Schupp" <ms*****@ielearning.com> wrote:
The problem you are going to see with ASP is that when the user scrolls
their view (horizontally or vertically) it will not scroll smoothly (as I
assume the Lotus Notes app does). The view will jump to the next display
area after a pause while the page is generated.


That would have NOTHING to do with ASP!!!! The ASP code runs on the
server. Once that ends, the HTML it generates is sent to the client,
where it's rendered on the screen. Scrolling happens on the client,
and it's up to the client whether it scrolls smoothly or jumpily. ASP
has finished its job by the time you see that problem.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(DTS)
Sl********@bls.gov

Jul 19 '05 #19

P: n/a
Still more feasible than moving the river. Just move the whole house and
have water front property. One more thing... You drink from the river?

"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
Ha! Maybe. But then you'd have to move the TV, the receiver, the TiVo, the speakers, the cats, etc.

Ray at work

"John Beschler" <gi***@geewhiz.com> wrote in message
news:03****************************@phx.gbl...
Ray,

Wouldn't it make more sense to move the sofa to the river?

Sorry, I couldn't resist!

:)

John
-----Original Message-----
I'd say it's just a matter of personal preference after

considering the
drawbacks of having that large or a response and putting

that extra strain
on the server. When you want a drink of water, do you

fill a glass and take
that with you back to your sofa, or do you pick up the

entire river and try
to lug that back to your sofa?

Ray at work


Jul 19 '05 #20

P: n/a
For your next trick...give them the data unsorted and let them search
through 500,000 records to find what they want. They might be a little more
receptive to selecting what they want before retrieving it from the
database.

One of the benefits of SQL databases is that they pass records, not files.
You appear to be wanting to pass the whole database * # of users. Perhaps
you should inform IT that it's time to get rid of the ARCnet too to speed
things up.

"Rich" wrote:
The biggest element/obstacle for me is the human element.
This is always the biggest obstacle, usually wearing an 'upper
mismanagement' name tag who is resistant to change a.k.a. CFO.
I write code. Not much for shmoozing.
PowerPoint goes a long way. You must have one element included in all
presentations: This will save us $_________.
My company
(supposedly the largest hmo in US) has been around for
quite a while and has not focused as much energy on
computer tech.
A large organization that doesn't have any trouble giving away millions to
upper management that refuses to keep up with technology. This must be
something new.
So I was one just a few techy types to
join on. These are hard people to sell on new technology
(heck, the stuff I'm trying to push is already 5+ years
old - wait till I start pushing VS.net).
Upper management bonuses are based on profitability, excluding Enron, Arthur
Andersen, WorldCom, etc. Spending money without a clear understanding that
it will save TIME, which has a direct connection to ROI, comes off as
expenditure, not revenue.
Lotus Notes has been the mainstay here for quite a few
years.
Everyone bow your heads. Let us pray...
They are comfortable with it and it's
limitations.
.... as they are with current management and their limitations.
If they plan on keeping up with/or ahead of
the competition they will eventually have to step up to
newer technology.
Since they're already 5 years behind, the competition must be also.
I had to do the biggest song and dance just to get them to
use Sql Server for reporting. Before, they were using
Access (1 gig limit) at 110% of capacity - Access kept
dying. Now using sql Server (only 6 gigs of data) we are
at 0.6% of capacity and reports run smooth and quick.
And the still don't know who you are or what you're doing for all that money
they're paying you.
So for my next trick, I need to convince them that IIS is way
more suited for their needs than Domino (notes server)
since all the data ends up in Microsoft based reports.
Keep everything in its native element.


I have found giving someone what they think they want instead of convincing
them of what they need usually backfires.

"I want to run 386 NetWare on all of my servers."
"But, your servers are all 286s. You need to upgrade!"
"I think that's a scam just to get more of my money. Make it work!"
"OK! Oh, while I'm at it, want me to prove Einstein's theory of
relativity?"
Jul 19 '05 #21

P: n/a
Ok, by a show of hands... how many of you are still using dialup on the
local LAN to get to the server?

"Phill. W" <P.A.Ward@o-p-e-n-.-a-c-.-u-k> wrote in message
news:bq**********@yarrow.open.ac.uk...
"Rich" <an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:cf****************************@phx.gbl...
I'm sure it sounds kinda nutty to display 200 columns and
500,000 rows of data.


You Betcha!!

Just consider the HTML needed to display it:

"<table>", plus
500,000 lots of "<tr>" with
200 lots of "<td>" and "</td>" within that, plus
500,000 lots of "</tr>", plus the final
"</table>"

that's:

7 + 500,000 * ( 4 + 200 * ( 4 + 5 ) + 5 ) + 8 bytes
= 904,500,015 bytes
~= 0.83 Gigabytes!!

and that's without *any* actual data in it!!

Transmission time: (not counting /building/ it on the server)

100Mbit ethernet 72 seconds
56Kbit modem: just shy of 36 hours.

Not quite in Our Friends in Redmond's league - just under seven
*days* for the /single-file/ download of Visual Studio 2003 - but
getting there... ;-)

Regards,
Phill W.

and yes; I'm /very/ familiar with dial-up download times... :-(

Jul 19 '05 #22

P: n/a
Notifies web-o-pedia that Tim Slattery has coined a new word:
jumpily
def. unsmooth scrolling of ASP generated data in a web browser

Wonder how long it'll take to debug...

Error on line 253,682. Unexpected result. Data is too large!
Line 253,682 reads: Patient reported uncontrollable erections.
"Tim Slattery" wrote:
Scrolling happens on the client,
and it's up to the client whether it scrolls smoothly or jumpily.

Jul 19 '05 #23

P: n/a
> Ok, by a show of hands... how many of you are still using dialup on the
local LAN to get to the server?


So, are you saying that 72 seconds is acceptable, and we should just dump
the whole database to a web page?

Also, many people *do* use their home connection to dial into their VPN,
when they are not physically in the office. And presumably, the point of
moving to an ASP app is so that employees can get the information from
anywhere - in or out of the office.
Jul 19 '05 #24

P: n/a

"Aaron Bertrand [MVP]" wrote:
Ok, by a show of hands... how many of you are still using dialup on the
local LAN to get to the server?
So, are you saying that 72 seconds is acceptable, and we should just dump
the whole database to a web page?


Nope. I didn't say anything. I asked a question. I think you
misunderstood it. Let me see if I can clear up the confusion:
You're in the office.
The server is across the hall.
You get on your modem and dial into the server.
Ridiculous? Yes.
Why did I ask the question? I thought it was ridiculous to include dialup as
a variable. Nothing had been said about usign dialup and I doubt very
seriously they're using it now with 400k rows using Notes.
Also, many people *do* use their home connection to dial into their VPN,
when they are not physically in the office. And presumably, the point of
moving to an ASP app is so that employees can get the information from
anywhere - in or out of the office.


Presumably? Where do get this from? He said he wanted to move to ASP
because why pull from notes to go to SQL. Why not just do everything in SQL
since data gets reported to M$ apps.

I'll grant you on your argument that it is a valid concern but he did not
raise these issues and IMHO it just adds to the confusion.

Ok, your turn. Fire away! (O:=
Jul 19 '05 #25

P: n/a
> since data gets reported to M$ apps.

...

Ok, your turn. Fire away! (O:=


Nah, not worth my time to argue with someone who uses a childish acronym
like M$.

--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
Jul 19 '05 #26

P: n/a
I'd explain it, but you didn't want to debate the issues, just attack me
personally. You appear to be pretty helpful and I'm sure your MVP status
was given because you earned it but looking back though GG, I see you also
have a habit of personal attacks. That's a shame since I explained my
reasoning and you chose to end the legitimate discussion with a personal
attack based on assumption. I even gave weight to what you were saying but
referenced that you brought it into the equation, not the originator. The
person who loses, when this happens, is the person seeking the help.

I've already explained it once.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=co...phx.gbl&rnum=1
"Aaron Bertrand [MVP]" wrote:
since data gets reported to M$ apps.

Ok, your turn. Fire away! (O:=


Nah, not worth my time to argue with someone who uses a childish acronym
like M$.

--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/

Jul 19 '05 #27

P: n/a
> I'd explain it, but you didn't want to debate the issues, just attack me
personally.


I didn't attack you, I called the use of the acronym "M$" childish. I see
it here all too often, and the behavior, in and of itself, seems to be
intended solely to divert attention away from the issues. And experience
has shown me that when a person does that, it is most often the case that a
debate of any kind would be useless.

My whole argument was about dropping the whole table to a web browser in one
shot (which is unacceptable, dialup or not) vs. breaking it up into
reasonable chunks. I don't really care about the dialup issue at all, but
brought it up because, perhaps unlike yourself or the original poster, it is
an issue that the rest of us *do* have to deal with when designing ASP
applications.

--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
Jul 19 '05 #28

P: n/a
Nice rebuff :~

No matter the previous incarnation using Lotus Notes, ASP and web pages are
not the place for massive tables (or whatever you use to show the data).
Paging or providing a search / filter mechanism or a warning that > 1000
rows cannot be displayed seem to be the only real alternatives for
non-ActiveX based solutions.

The browser will take minutes to parse and display such a huge set of data
anyway so the prospect of it being usable is minimal.

You *could* use a client side ActiveX component in IE to show a datagrid and
use an asynchronous mechanism to stream the data to the client thus
providing a seamless experience and to my mind that is the only way that you
will get such a huge amount of data to the client at all.

However, you seem set on trying to emulate a significantly more powerful
system (Lotus Notes - internal LAN I presume) with a web browser so if you
ever get it working then let me know - I'd love to stress test my ADSL
router for about an hour :)

Cheers,

Chris.
"Roland Hall" <nobody@nowhere> wrote in message
news:%2***************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
I'd explain it, but you didn't want to debate the issues, just attack me
personally. You appear to be pretty helpful and I'm sure your MVP status
was given because you earned it but looking back though GG, I see you also
have a habit of personal attacks. That's a shame since I explained my
reasoning and you chose to end the legitimate discussion with a personal
attack based on assumption. I even gave weight to what you were saying but
referenced that you brought it into the equation, not the originator. The
person who loses, when this happens, is the person seeking the help.

I've already explained it once.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=co...phx.gbl&rnum=1
"Aaron Bertrand [MVP]" wrote:
since data gets reported to M$ apps.

Ok, your turn. Fire away! (O:=


Nah, not worth my time to argue with someone who uses a childish acronym
like M$.

--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/


Jul 19 '05 #29

P: n/a
"Aaron Bertrand - MVP" wrote:
I'd explain it, but you didn't want to debate the issues, just attack me
personally.
I didn't attack you, I called the use of the acronym "M$" childish.


And it's not except that is your opinion.
MS is more widely known as to represent a single independent woman or a
really bad disease or a state. I do not see MS and think Microsoft and I
get tired of writing Microsoft when it's easier, especially in this industry
to use an acronym. When I first saw it, I too was offended until I learned
it represented commercial vs open system.
I see it here all too often, and the behavior, in and of itself, seems to be intended solely to divert attention away from the issues.
How could the use of the acronym in itself divert away from the issue?
And experience
has shown me that when a person does that, it is most often the case that a debate of any kind would be useless.
What? What a person uses an acronym then the discussion is off the table or
when they use one you disagree with or don't understand? It appears you are
right about one thing. It has taken the discussion off topic.
My whole argument was about dropping the whole table to a web browser in one shot (which is unacceptable, dialup or not) vs. breaking it up into
reasonable chunks.
I agree. It is ridiculous to give anyone that much data for any reason no
matter what connection they were using.
I don't really care about the dialup issue at all, but
brought it up because, perhaps unlike yourself or the original poster, it is an issue that the rest of us *do* have to deal with when designing ASP
applications.


That's fine but why push it in this discussion when delivering 500,000 rows
is ridiculous across the network. Dialup would make it even that much more
absurd. The point had already been made and a valid one at that.

--
Roland

This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose.
Jul 19 '05 #30

P: n/a
> That's fine but why push it in this discussion when delivering 500,000
rows
is ridiculous across the network. Dialup would make it even that much more absurd. The point had already been made and a valid one at that.


Let's review.

Phill mentioned how long it would take for dialup users to download a
ridiculous page.

You decided to take a survey, asking how many people use dialup against
their LAN.

I replied, stating that there *are* people who connect to their LAN, via
dialup, through a VPN. In fact, there are people in this very office that
do that.

So, what are you on about?
Jul 19 '05 #31

P: n/a
Unsolicited responses inline:
"Roland Hall" <nobody@nowhere> wrote in message
news:ua**************@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
"Aaron Bertrand - MVP" wrote:
I'd explain it, but you didn't want to debate the issues, just attack me personally.
I didn't attack you, I called the use of the acronym "M$" childish.


And it's not except that is your opinion.
MS is more widely known as to represent a single independent woman or

a really bad disease or a state. I do not see MS and think Microsoft and I get tired of writing Microsoft when it's easier, especially in this industry to use an acronym. When I first saw it, I too was offended until I learned it represented commercial vs open system.
Your in an MS newgroup, talking about MS technology. It's all about
context. It's unlikely (but not impossible) that we would be talking
about MS or even MS. Sure someone may have a question about using MS
technology to create an application to track donations for a research
group trying to cure MS located in MS, but how often does that happen?
Secondly, there is nothing inherently non-commercial about open systems
(read as Open Source Software). It's free as in speech, not necessarily
free as in beer.
I see it here all too often, and the behavior, in and of itself, seems to be
intended solely to divert attention away from the issues.
How could the use of the acronym in itself divert away from the issue?


Does anyone remember what the topic was origianlly. I got lost somewhere
along the way.
And experience
has shown me that when a person does that, it is most often the case that a
debate of any kind would be useless.
What? What a person uses an acronym then the discussion is off the

table or when they use one you disagree with or don't understand? It appears you are right about one thing. It has taken the discussion off topic.
Yes, the discussion is off the table, at least until we all get back
from the Crusades(TM).
My whole argument was about dropping the whole table to a web browser in one
shot (which is unacceptable, dialup or not) vs. breaking it up into
reasonable chunks.
I agree. It is ridiculous to give anyone that much data for any

reason no matter what connection they were using.
Agreed then. But don't try to change the subject back. Let's keep
fighting about acronyms.
I don't really care about the dialup issue at all, but
brought it up because, perhaps unlike yourself or the original poster, it is
an issue that the rest of us *do* have to deal with when designing
ASP applications.


That's fine but why push it in this discussion when delivering 500,000

rows is ridiculous across the network. Dialup would make it even that much more absurd. The point had already been made and a valid one at that.
This has nothing to do with acronyms! If you want to discuss using ASP
to display 500,00 rows start a new thread.
--
Roland

This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.


-Chris "Call me a fish, 'cause I took the bait" Hohmann
Jul 19 '05 #32

P: n/a

"Aaron Bertrand - MVP" <aa***@TRASHaspfaq.com> wrote in message
news:eW**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

So, what are you on about?


That was good. :]

Ray at work
Jul 19 '05 #33

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.