<howardw39> wrote in message news:13664@forums.infragistics.com...I put together a grid using Outlook style grouping, with about 30 choosable columns. About a third of the columns have custom summaries, and about half of these use custom Formulas in conjunction with an UltraCalcManager. It works OK except for one problem. When I change the grouping, or the sort order of a group, the change may take a second or so (there are 6,000 rows in the underlying table) before the grid appears to have updated. That is OK. But then the CPU keeps chugging away for another 5 to 15 seconds. Worse, with certain groupings, the CPU keeps going apparently indefinitely, as if it is in a loop. The UI continues to be responsive, so something is going on in a background thread. Does anyone recognize this issue or have advice on how to fix it?. http://forums.infragistics.com/forums/p/1887/13664.aspx#13664
Hi Howard,
Do you have the latest Hot Fix? There was a known issue with grouping and formulas that could sometimes cause a performance issue like this. I'm pretty sure it was fixed.
If the latest Hot Fix doesn't help, you should submit a small sample project demonstrating this behavior to Infragistics Developer Support.
Get Help
Hello,
My team and me have the same problem with UltraGrid : when the DataSource already contains a list of object and we perfrom outlook group by, it's very quick. But when the DataSource is empty, a outlook group by is already performed and we assign a list to the DataSource it's very very slow.
We have upgraded to the latest Infragistics WinForm 2007 Vol 3 + HotFix, but the problem persist.
Infragistics : is this bug already identified ? Is there a hotfix in preparation for that ?
Thank you (and sorry for my bad English).
I'm afraid I don't have any other information on that. If you are still having the problem with the latest Hot Fix, then you should report the issue to Infragistics Developer Support.
Submit an incident to Infragistics Developer Support
I submitted this two months ago and received the following reply. Since then, nothing.
I was able to reproduce the behavior of long calculation time of the summary formula at my end. I have logged this behavior with our developers in our tracking system, with an issue ID of BR30242. This development issue will be assigned to a developer to research for a fix, workaround, or other resolution. If some other resolution is reached, I will contact you with this information. Issue Description: "Long calculation time for the SummaryFormula in the UltraWinGrid in GroupBy mode".
Issue Description: "Long calculation time for the SummaryFormula in the UltraWinGrid in GroupBy mode".
Then I recommend contacting Infragistics Developer Support and following up with them on the status of the issue.
I sent this e-mail:
Although we now seem to have a viable workaround, I'm still looking forward to receiving the full revision of the calculation engine. I think the recalculation times, although now acceptable for the point of view of users, are still too long. For example, with two group-by rows and 6,000 base rows, we should be able to do the recalculation in two passes thru the data x four partial summary calculations. Since this currently takes about 12 seconds on a 2 GHz processor, we are using (12 x 2,000,000,000) / (2 x 4 x 6000) = 500,000 CPU cycles for each partial calculation, which not reasonable. The engine must be re-calculating something over and over or doing some other unnecessary slow thing.
Infragistics sent me a workaround:
1. Install the latest hot fix (2007 V3 or 2008 v1).
2. In the BeforeSortChange event, add the following: e.ProcessMode = ProcessMode.Synchronous;
This fixed the test app that I sent them, but our production App still would hang up calculating summaries when re-sorting. I found an additional workaround which, in combination with the above, eliminated this behavior:
3. In the BeforeSortChange event, remove the summarycolumns that are of type SummaryType.Formula, using code like the following:
index = Grid.DisplayLayout.Bands[0].Summaries.IndexOf("Target"); if (index >= 0) Grid.DisplayLayout.Bands[0].Summaries.RemoveAt(index);
Light at the end of the tunnel ....?
Howard,
Your message has been forwarded to my attention.
Our developers are still working on development issue BR30242. From what I understand, the solution that our developers are considering involve changes to a number of things that interact with each other in a complicated fashion. It will likely take quite a bit more time for our developers to finish the task and resolve this performance problem.
To ensure that this issue maintains the appropriate visibility within Infragistics, I am escalating this issue.
As noted before, you will be automatically notified when a fix for this issue is ready for download. If we identify a workaround or other solution that doesn't require waiting for a hot fix release, a Developer Support Engineer will notify you, via the Support.Net@infragistics.com email address I've copied on this message.
Sincerely,
Vince McDonald
Manager of Developer Support, MCP
Infragistics, Inc.
I think this bug is not connected with custom formulas.For me the necessary conditions for reproducing are:There are many rows in grid (> 1000) and 3 or more columns are "grouped by".If I clear the data source and fill it with the new data, the application hangs.Here is a workaround I use:I've created the following class:
public class SwitchOffGroupByCookie : IDisposable { private readonly UltraGrid grid_; private readonly UltraGridLayout layout_ = new UltraGridLayout(); public SwitchOffGroupByCookie(UltraGrid grid) { grid_ = grid; layout_.CopyFrom(grid_.DisplayLayout); grid_.DisplayLayout.Bands[0].SortedColumns.Clear(); } public void Dispose() { if (layout_.Bands[0].SortedColumns.Count > 0) { foreach (UltraGridColumn col in layout_.Bands[0].SortedColumns) { grid_.DisplayLayout.Bands[0].SortedColumns.Add(col.Key, (col.SortIndicator == SortIndicator.Descending), col.IsGroupByColumn); } } } }
using (new SwitchOffGroupByCookie(grid_)) { dataSource_.Rows.Clear(); // fill data source with the new data }