Last post Sep 09, 2014 03:22 PM by jhcorey
Aug 27, 2014 06:32 PM|jhcorey|LINK
We are having a problem with this setup when we have more than 500 rows in the gridview.
The business requirement does not allow us to do paging as we are replacing a classic ASP app and have to match it.
We have discovered that the problem occurs when rendering the page, as the server-side code has completed.
If we run this in Chrome, the page renders in a few seconds, but in IE9 the same data can take over a minute.
I've seen articles like this:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/tom/archive/2008/09/15/slow-performance-of-a-gridview-inside-an-updatepanel.aspx but it didn't work for us.
I'm considering changing from a gridview to a listview but I'm not sure if that will have everything I need.
Aug 27, 2014 07:06 PM|AidyF|LINK
One thing you can try right away is to disable the viewstate.
or better yet disable it on the whole page via the "Page" directive at the top.
Aug 27, 2014 07:39 PM|jhcorey|LINK
Yes, I should have mentioned, we set EnableViewState=false on the GridView.
We have a column of hidden checkboxes, but otherwise all columns have ItemTemplates with Labels.
Aug 27, 2014 11:51 PM|chetan.sarode|LINK
Hi, Please refer this
For an example of using page methods vs. UpdatePanels, check this out:
Sep 09, 2014 03:22 PM|jhcorey|LINK
I was able to get some improvement. The gridviews had many template fields, which in turn had labels inside. I replaced these with bound fields where possible and got a dramatic improvement in performance.
We called MS support and they had us send a Fiddler session, then they confirmed that most of the time was being taken up rendering the screen. They were able to run the results in a browser and they also said that IE 10 or 11 were much faster than IE 9,
which is what we have to support.
Anyway, the issue seems to be the markup and script that gets added with template fields as opposed to simpler controls.