maximum rows added to table

[enrique]

Does anyone know what the upper limit is to the number of rows you can
dynamically add to an HTML table, using Javascript? I tried to make a
table consisting of over 74,000 rows and Firefox stops rendering the
page. I didn't notice any exceptions being thrown or any other
external indicator that something is wrong, other than the page not
being rendered all the way.

If you happen to know if there is a number to this I should be aware
of, please respond

Thanks.

 

[Evertjan.]

enrique wrote on 02 mei 2008 in comp.lang.javascript:

Does anyone know what the upper limit is to the number of rows you can
dynamically add to an HTML table, using Javascript? I tried to make a
table consisting of over 74,000 rows and Firefox stops rendering the
page. I didn't notice any exceptions being thrown or any other
external indicator that something is wrong, other than the page not
being rendered all the way.

If you happen to know if there is a number to this I should be aware
of, please respond

The language has no limit, The DOM, as implemented in different browsers,
might have, but the DOM is not part of Javascript. So the answer in general
is unanswerable, for a specific browser, there might be a limit.

I suppose the limit depends on the maximum memory set available for that
purpose.

==============

Using a html table of 74,000 rows in a browser is nonsensical in itself.

That is not where browser were made for. Other technologies are much more
appropriate for displaying such number, be it that the visual use and the
scrollability is null.

Perhaps you plan to make a 3000 page book using a browser?

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Does anyone know what the upper limit is to the number of rows you can
dynamically add to an HTML table, using Javascript? I tried to make a
table consisting of over 74,000 rows and Firefox stops rendering the
page. I didn't notice any exceptions being thrown or any other
external indicator that something is wrong, other than the page not
being rendered all the way.

If you happen to know if there is a number to this I should be aware
of, please respond

I don't know of any specified limit. However, there is a practical limit of
course, both regarding memory size and usability. If you don't recognize by
yourself that a table with more than, say, 2000 rows is unusable, you are
really beyond help.


PointedEars

 

[enrique]

If you don't recognize by
yourself that a table with more than, say, 2000 rows is unusable, you are
really beyond help.

Guys, PLEASE let's keep the discussion friendly.

I didn't intend to debate why I would want to display 74,000 rows in a
single table. It's not important for the purposes of this question.
I'm asking if there is a known limitation with the DOM's ability to
dynamically add rows to an HTML table (as if I needed to restate the
question.)

If you care to discuss the aesthetics about web page readability and
usability, feel free to start a new thread in the appropriate
discussion group.

Thank you.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Guys, PLEASE let's keep the discussion friendly.

This *was* a friendly reminder that what you are doing is considered
nonsense actually, and so your question as it is really does not matter even
if somebody knew the answer (it cannot be known for sure, as not all DOMs
are open source). As I have pointed out, chances are that you are merely
running into a memory limit which may differ between user agents, operating
systems, and platforms.

I didn't intend to debate why I would want to display 74,000 rows in a
single table. It's not important for the purposes of this question. I'm
asking if there is a known limitation with the DOM's ability to
dynamically add rows to an HTML table (as if I needed to restate the
question.)

As indicated by your trimming the quotation too much, you missed the point.

If you care to discuss the aesthetics about web page readability and
usability, feel free to start a new thread in the appropriate discussion
group.

This is Usenet, not your private support forum. You are not to dictate
what is discussed and how it is discussed in a thread that you started.
Like it or leave it.


PointedEars

 

[Dr J R Stockton]

In comp.lang.javascript message <[email protected]>, Sat,

This *was* a friendly reminder

If you expect your approach to communication to be seen as friendly be
normal readers, then you are both naive and a slow learner.

 

[Laurent vilday]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn a écrit :

This *was* a friendly reminder

Of course it was *NOT*

 

[Jorge]

Does anyone know what the upper limit is to the number of rows you can
dynamically add to an HTML table, using Javascript? I tried to make a
table consisting of over 74,000 rows and Firefox stops rendering the
page.  I didn't notice any exceptions being thrown or any other
external indicator that something is wrong, other than the page not
being rendered all the way.

If you happen to know if there is a number to this I should be aware
of, please respond

Thanks.

Safari on a Mac : more than 200k rows : it rocks.
FF2 on a Mac : sluggish @ ~70k rows.
Opera on a Mac : sluggish ~from the start.
Safari windows : ok up to 100k rows then stops responding.
IE8b Windozes : sluggish @ ~6k rows : it sucks.
FF2 Windows : sluggish @ ~70k rows.

click into the window to stop / continue adding rows :

HTH,
--Jorge.

<html>
<head>
<meta name="author" content="jorge">
<!-- Date: 2008-05-05 -->

<!--567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
-->
<script>
window.go = true;
window.onclick = function () { window.go = !window.go; };
window.onload = function () {
var table = document.createElement("table");
document.body.appendChild(table);
table.next=1;
(function () {
var row, cell, i, me = arguments.callee;
if (window.go) {
for (i=0; i<100; i++) {
cell = document.createElement("td");
(cell).innerHTML = "row # "+ (table.next++);
(row = document.createElement("tr")).appendChild(cell);
table.insertBefore(row, table.firstChild);
}
}
setTimeout(me, 5);
})();
};
</script>

</head>
<body>
</body>
</html>

 

[enrique]

Safari on a Mac : more than 200k rows : it rocks.
FF2 on a Mac : sluggish @ ~70k rows.
Opera on a Mac : sluggish ~from the start.
Safari windows : ok up to 100k rows then stops responding.
IE8b Windozes : sluggish @ ~6k rows : it sucks.
FF2 Windows : sluggish @ ~70k rows.

click into the window to stop / continue adding rows :

HTH,
--Jorge.

<html>
<head>
<meta name="author" content="jorge">
<!-- Date: 2008-05-05 -->

<!--567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
-->
<script>
window.go = true;
window.onclick = function () { window.go = !window.go; };
window.onload = function () {
var table = document.createElement("table");
document.body.appendChild(table);
table.next=1;
(function () {
var row, cell, i, me = arguments.callee;
if (window.go) {
for (i=0; i<100; i++) {
cell = document.createElement("td");
(cell).innerHTML = "row # "+ (table.next++);
(row = document.createElement("tr")).appendChild(cell);
table.insertBefore(row, table.firstChild);
}
}
setTimeout(me, 5);
})();
};
</script>

</head>
<body>
</body>
</html>

Very interesting results! Thanks for sharing.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Does anyone know what the upper limit is to the number of rows you can
dynamically add to an HTML table, using Javascript? I tried to make a
table consisting of over 74,000 rows and Firefox stops rendering the
page. I didn't notice any exceptions being thrown or any other
external indicator that something is wrong, other than the page not
being rendered all the way.

If you happen to know if there is a number to this I should be aware
of, please respond
[...]

Safari on a Mac : more than 200k rows : it rocks.
FF2 on a Mac : sluggish @ ~70k rows.
Opera on a Mac : sluggish ~from the start.
Safari windows : ok up to 100k rows then stops responding.
IE8b Windozes : sluggish @ ~6k rows : it sucks.
FF2 Windows : sluggish @ ~70k rows.

Unsurprisingly, your results could not be less representative, for what you
observed heavily depends on the hardware and software used, platform and
operating system very much aside. Hence my first reply.


PointedEars

 

[Jorge]

Unsurprisingly, your results could not be less representative, for what you
observed heavily depends on the hardware and software used, platform and
operating system very much aside.  Hence my first reply.

Well, that's so for any test of any program... e.g. M$ Excel ?

--Jorge. (bottom-posting

 

[Jorge]

var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
    navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
    && navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
)  // Plone, register_function.js:16

function its (p) { return (navigator.userAgent.indexOf(p) != -1) };
if (its('MSIE') && its('Windows')) {
try { run() } catch (e) { get_a_Mac() }
}

--Jorge.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Well, that's so for any test of any program... e.g. M$ Excel ?

A test of even standing the chance of being representative would not only
include a much greater variety of platforms, user agents and operating
systems, but also a great variety of hardware and software configurations
(for example, a sub-test with resource killing applications like Microsoft
Office running and one, under otherwise the same conditions, with such an
application not running).

Since it would be much too expensive, and ultimately futile to set up such a
test (because the results would be obsolete the day, maybe the hour, after)
just to satisfy the OP's curiosity, it should suffice to say that tables
should not have that many rows. Which is an opinion that can merely be
formed by applying common sense to this problem.


PointedEars