I am working on ASP.Net webforms i have a user control with multiple input fields around 50-60 fields. The data from these fields is being saved and loaded on a save button click right now which takes alot of time.
I wanted to know if I save the data from these input fields using ajax calling a webservice on the focusout or blur event of the input field! is that a better alternative? And will it cause problems if multiple users are calling this web service so many times!! Any other solutions to my problem will be appreciated :)
No, this is not a good method, as people might end up sending a lot of blank data and this is just a waste of bandwidth. Remember, it will take almost equally long for sending data from all text fields, when compared with sending from one text field. Validation of the data could also be a problem and there will end up being a lot of code redundancies, regarding the extra validation and ajax calls being made. On the other hand, if you use an intermediate server, it can be a lot more responsive, assuming the ping between the intermediate and the user is low and the ping between the intermediate and the back-end server is also low and controlled by you.
Other than that, I don't know of any better method than sending all the data on a form submit.
Related
We have a very large HTML form (> 100 fields) that updates a SQL Server database with user-entered data. It will take the user a long time to fill out the form, but every piece of information they submit is very valuable to the business process. Even if the user gives up on the form, we want to retain everything they have entered.
We plan to attach an onblur event to each field and use jQuery/AJAX to post each piece of data back to the application server immediately. That part is pretty straightforward. The question we have is when and how to best save this application-level information to the database. Again, our priority is data retention as opposed to performance but we also want to do this as efficiently as possible.
Options as I see it are:
Have the web service immediately post each piece of data to the database server.
Store the information in a custom class on the application server, then periodically call an update method to post new data to the database.
Store the information in view or session state, then run a routine to post this information to the database server.
Something else that we haven't thought of.
Option 1 seems the most obviously failsafe, but also the most resource intensive. Option 2 seems the most elegant, but can we be absolutely certain that the custom class instance can't be destroyed without first running its update method?
Thanks for your help!
IMHO, I'd really cut up the form into sections (if possible). Since this is ASP.Net, if you are using Web Forms then look into using wizards (cut up the form into logical Steps)
You can do same without Form Wizard, but still cut up the process into logical steps, client-side. You can probably do this in pure JavaScript, but it would likely be easier if you used a framework (jQuery, Knockout, etc.) - the concept remains the same, cut up the form entry process into sections (aka 'Steps') - e.g. using display toggles, divs for each "step", etc.
"retain everything even if abandoned later": assumed that the steps are "hierarchical" where the "most critical" inputs are at the beginning. This makes the "steps" approach even more important - this is a "logical group" (of inputs you really want) so if you do the Step approach, then you can save this data (of this "step") to DB in whatever fashion you deem appropriate (e.g. Ajax, or ASP.Net Post/postback).
Hth...
I would package everything up in some xml or dataset (.getxml) and pass the xml to a stored procedure....
How to pass XML from C# to a stored procedure in SQL Server 2008?
And maybe put the call on a background thread.
http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/CSASPNETBackgroundWorker-dda8d7b6
The xml will be faster than calling the values row by row (RBAR).
You can save just the xml, or shred the xml into a relational table(s).
I have a client who wants to return an ENORMOUS query from a web service, and will not budge. They are adamant that the query must be able to return absolutely everything, and they also will not allow us to do any sort of server side paging.
We have it working so that it returns all the data just fine, and we have it displayed in an ASP.NET GridView. In order to speed up the rendering of the huge grid, we decided to implement client-side paging, but I'm not exactly sure how to go about this.
Currently, we store the whole of the data in the ViewState, and then page and sort based off of that so as to avoid hitting the server again.
However, with the default set up, when trying to select any page but the first, it returns a 404 error. I'm guessing this is because it times out while trying to send the enormous data set via the ViewState.
Is there any sort of way to return the data set, and then do all of the paging and sorting all on the client without having to do any sort of post back? Or is there some other way to do this that we haven't thought of? (besides server side paging. We would LOVE to do it this way because it is so obviously the right way, but the client won't budge...)
EDIT: I would like to stick to the ASP.NET GridView control if at all possible. We've found a couple different options like jQuery and the like, but we have a lot of things to change if we change to a different type of control. So I'd like to avoid changing that if at all possible.
If the time is not a big problem for you the time it takes to get all the records from the database and I believe that on the client side the grid is typically renders as an HTML table than you can use a jquery plugin that will paginate the table on the client side.
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/webforms/clientside_gridviewpaging.aspx
We've run into situations where the Viewstate itself becomes a performance issue, and had to come up with ways to address a similar situation...
Your options depend greatly on some details which aren't included in the question.
For example? How often does the data from the webservice change? You may be able to do one of the following:
Save the results in Cache or Session (not a good idea if the results are that large...)
Serialize the result to an Xml file and read from that while paging
Import the data periodically into a SQL database, or into a temp table in a SQL database, with some identifier to tie the data to the user.
I've had good luck using the jquery tablesorter plugin. It gives some great options.
http://tablesorter.com/docs/
I'm working on an asp.net website with telerik controls. Im using multiple conditional grids (Show data based on selection in a grid.)
Every time I do new selection it is kinda slow (I'm using ajax call). Is it possible to preload all data to the client and then instantly show it to user.
I mean, is there any simple way of doing so?
There is a good chance that the slowness comes from the amount of data being rendered on your page. Keep in mind that AJAX still goes through the entire life-cycle of the page; the savings come from not having to render the entire page, just the updated parts.
Are your AJAX settings correctly updating the controls, or do you have a massive 'pnlAllControls' updating 'pnlAllControls'?
For example -- if you have Grid1, Grid2, Grid3; and Grid1 updates (Grid2, Grid3) while Grid2 updates only (Grid3), you should set your AJAX accordingly.
If your controls are getting data from the server, it does not make sense to cache the data on the client. I am not sure how much control you have over configuring them [controls].
You can store/cache data on server side instead (e.g. Cache, Session etc.). The data retrieval from there should be fast unless you send tons of data back and forth. But, caching data (on either client or server) should only be considered if the amount is 1)predictable and 2)relatively small.
Another technique to consider is paging/sorting on the server side. From my experience, you can get a real performance boost using just this.
There is no simple answer to your question. It all depends on data volume, security requirements. Moreover, your controls may not be able to pull data from the client-side.
I have a web app, that consumes a web service. The main page runs a search - by passing parameters to a particular web service method, and I bind the results to a gridview.
I have implemented sorting and paging on the grid. By putting the datatable that the grid is bound to in the viewstate and then reading / sorting / filtering it as necessary - and rebinding to the grid.
As the amount of data coming back from the web service has increased dramatically, when I try to page/sort etc I receive the following errors.
The connection was reset
The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.
I have searched around a bit, and it seems that a very large viewstate is to blame for this.
But surely the only other option is to
Limit the results
Stick the datatable in the session rather than the viewstate
Something else I am unaware of
Previously I did have the datatable in the session, as some of this data needed to persist from page to page - (not being posted however so viewstate was not an option). As the amount of data rose and the necessity to persist it was removed, I used the viewstate instead. Thinking this was a better option than the session because of the amount of data the session would have to hold and the number of users using the app.
It appears maybe not.
I thought that when the viewstate got very big, that .net split it over more than one hidden viewstate field, but it seems all I'm getting is one mammoth viewstate that I have trouble viewing in the source.
Can anyone enlighten me as to how to avoid the error I'm getting? If it is indeed to do with the amount of data in the viewstate?
It sounds like your caching the whole dataset for all pages even though you are only presenting one page of that data. I would change your pagination to only require the data for the current page the user is on.
If the query is heavy and you don't want to have to be constantly calling it over and over because there is a lot of paging back and forth (you should test typical useage pattern) then I would implement some type of caching on the web service end to cache page by page (by specific user if the data is specific to a user) and have it expire rather quick (eg a few minuites).
I think you need to limit the total amount of data your dealing with. Change your code to not pass back extra data that might never be needed is a good place to start.
EDIT: Based on your comments:
You can't change the web service
The user can manipulate the query by filtering or sorting
There is a large amount of data returned by the web service
The data is user specific
Well I think you have a perfect case for using the Session then. This can be taxing the the server with large amounts of users and data so you might want to implement some logic to clear the data from the Session and not wait for it to expire (like on certain landing pages you know the user will go when they are done, clear the session data).
You really want to get it out of the ViewState beacuse it is a huge bandwidth hog. Just look at your physical page size and that data is being passed back and forth with every action. Moving it to the Session would eliminate that bandwidth useage and allow for you to do everything you need.
You could also look at the data the web service is bringing back and store it in a custom object that you make as 'thin' as possible. If your storing a DataSet or a DataTable in your Session, those objects have some extra overhead you probably don't need so store the data as an array of some custom thin object and just bind to that. You would need to map the result from the WS to your custom object but this is a good option you cut down on memory useage.
Let me know if there is something else I am missing.
I wouldn't put the data in either the view state or the session. Instead store the bare minimum information to re-request the dataset from the web service and store that (in either view state or session, or even on the URL). Then call the web service using that data and reaction the data on each request. If necessary, look to use some form of caching (memCache) to improve performance.
I have always seen a lot of hidden fields used in web applications. I have worked with code which is written to use a lot of hidden fields and the data values from the visible fields sent back and forth to them. Though I fail to understand why the hidden fields are used. I can almost always think of ways to resolve the same problem without the use of hidden fields. How do hidden fields help in design?
Can anyone tell me what exactly is the advantage that hidden fields provide? Why are hidden fields used?
Hidden fields is just the easiest way, that is why they are used quite a bit.
Alternatives:
storing data in a session server-side (with sessionid cookie)
storing data in a transaction server-side (with transaction id as the single hidden field)
using URL path instead of hidden field query parameters where applicable
Main concerns:
the value of the hidden field cannot be trusted to not be tampered with from page to page (as opposed to server-side storage)
big data needs to be posted every time, could be a problem, and is not possible for some data (for example uploaded images)
Main advantages:
no sticky sessions that spill between pages and multiple browser windows
no server-side cleanup necessary (for expired data)
accessible to client-side scripts
Suppose you want to edit an object. Now it's helpful to put the ID into a hidden field. Of course, you must never rely on that value (i.e. make sure the user has appropriate rights upon insert/update).
Still, this is a very convenient solution. Showing the ID in a visible field (e.g. read-only text box) is possible, but irritating to the user.
Storing the ID in a session / cookie is prohibitive, because it disallows multiple opened edit windows at the same time and imposes lifetime restrictions (session timeout leads to a broken edit operation, very annoying).
Using the URL is possible, but breaks design rules, i.e. use POST when modifying data. Also, since it is visible to the user it creates uglier URLs.
Most typical use I see/use is for IDs and other things that really don't need to be on the page for any other reason than its needed at some point to be sent back to the server.
-edit, should've included more detail-
say for instance you have some object you want to update -- the UI sends back a collection of values and the server at that point may or may not know "hey this is a customer object" so you fire off a request to the server and say "hey, give me ID 7" and now you have your customer object as the system knows it. The updates are applied, validated, whatever and now your UI gets the completed result.
I guess a good excuse/argument is using linq. Try to update an object in linq without getting it from the DB first. It has no real idea that it's something it can keep track of until you get the full object.
heres one reason, convenient way of passing data between client code (javascript) and server side.
There are many useful scenarios.
One is to "store" some data on a page which should not be entered by a user. For example, store the user ID when generate a page, then this value will be auto-submitted with the form back to the server.
One other scenario is security. Add some hidden token to the page and check its existence on the server. This will help identify whether a form was submitted via the browser or by some bot which just posted to some url on your site.
It keeps things out of the URL (as in the querystring) so it keeps that clean. It also keeps things out of Session that may not necessarily need to be in there.
Other than that, I can't think of too many other benefits.
They are generally used to store state as an interaction progresses. Cookies could be used instead, but some people disable them. Could also use a single hidden field to point at server-side state, but then there are session-stickiness issues.
If you are using hidden field in the form, you are increasing the burden of form by including a new control.
If there is no need to take hidden field, you should't take it because it is not suitable on the bases of security point. using hidden field does not come under the good programming. Because it also affect the performance of application.