We use cookies to give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to browse, then you agree to our privacy policy and cookie policy. Image for the cookie policy date


Hello I''m using a Datatable as datasouce for a DataboundGrid. As performance is very important to us, did you have any experience for this ? It look likes the DataTable is a heavy in memory and CPU. Do you think we should implement our own "Table" ? Then i understant we have no sorting and no filtering Jane B.

3 Replies

AD Administrator Syncfusion Team February 7, 2005 06:11 PM UTC

You might take a look at Syncfusion\Essential Suite\\Windows\Grid.Windows\Samples\DataBound\GridPerf. It shows how to get optimal performance using a DataTable. Have not really tried this, but you could probably set up some simple load tests using an ArrayList of objects vs a DataTable as the datasource. This would allow you to judge whether gains in memory saving/performance would justify the additional work of trying to manage a custom collection class.

AD Administrator Syncfusion Team February 7, 2005 10:29 PM UTC

Actually i did try both but i can''t see clearly the difference. The datatable take 40% more memory and both the datatable and the custom collection seem to consume the same processor %

AD Administrator Syncfusion Team February 8, 2005 01:05 AM UTC

I think performance of datatables start to worsen when you start trying to add/remove records (particularly in a sorted DataTable). The way to get the fastest update performance is to use a virtual GridControl. This is more work on your part than using a GridDataBoundGrid as you would have to handle standard GridDataBoundGrid functionality like sorting or filtering in addition to the virtual events like QueryCellInfo and SaveCellInfo.

Live Chat Icon For mobile
Up arrow icon