|
| DataBinder.Eval alternative |
|
|
|
|
| Messages |
|
Related Types |
This message was discovered on ASPFriends.com 'aspngspeed' list.
| Yannick Smits |
I heard I should avoid use of DataBinder.Eval because of it's late binding.
Now I'm trying to rewrite some code but not sure how. What I have is:
<%# DataBinder.Eval(Container.DataItem, "myDate", "{:D}" %>
I found a way to do the same without DataBinder.Eval but I think it is also late-binding. Can somebody confirm?:
<%# Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString("d MMM yyy") %>
Is this way better than the DataBinder.Eval method? Or should I use the ItemDataBound event in combination with the findcontrol
technique to get 30% performance gain?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
| | |
| |
| Yannick Smits |
Thanks Susan, but what about:
<%# Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString("d MMM yyy") %>
Is it slow too? Or is it just the DataBinder.Eval that is slow?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
"Susan Warren" <Click here to reveal e-mail address> wrote in message news:452582@aspngspeed...
If you want avoid the reflection cost of DataBinder.Eval, try this:
<%# String.Format("{0:D}",((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"])
%>
-----Original Message-----
From: Yannick Smits [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:44 AM
To: aspngspeed
Subject: [aspngspeed] DataBinder.Eval alternative
I heard I should avoid use of DataBinder.Eval because of it's late
binding.
Now I'm trying to rewrite some code but not sure how. What I have is:
<%# DataBinder.Eval(Container.DataItem, "myDate", "{:D}" %>
I found a way to do the same without DataBinder.Eval but I think it is
also late-binding. Can somebody confirm?:
<%#
Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString
("d MMM yyy") %>
Is this way better than the DataBinder.Eval method? Or should I use the
ItemDataBound event in combination with the findcontrol
technique to get 30% performance gain?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
| [aspngspeed] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngspeed.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
| Susan Warren |
This is essentially the same as the string I sent you, speed-wise. No
reflection here, which is the costly part of DataBinder.Eval. But the
efficiency may be a bit less than perfect. Your line of code does the
following:=20
1. casts the dataitem to type DataRowView:
(DataRowView)Container.DataItem)
2. accesses ["myDate"] via a named accessor. This return an
object
3. does a .ToString(format) on the object
up to this point it's equivalent to the String.Format variant I sent
below.
4. THEN your expression does a Covert.ToDateTime() --=20
why #4??? Are you after a value of type DateTime? If so, why not:
<%# (DateTime)((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"] %>
And skip the conversion to/from string altogether?
hth.
Susan
-----Original Message-----
From: Yannick Smits [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 7:10 AM
To: aspngspeed
Subject: [aspngspeed] Re: DataBinder.Eval alternative
Thanks Susan, but what about:
<%#
Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString
("d MMM yyy") %>
Is it slow too? Or is it just the DataBinder.Eval that is slow?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
"Susan Warren" <Click here to reveal e-mail address> wrote in message
news:452582@aspngspeed...
If you want avoid the reflection cost of DataBinder.Eval, try this:
<%# String.Format("{0:D}",((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"])
%>
-----Original Message-----
From: Yannick Smits [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:44 AM
To: aspngspeed
Subject: [aspngspeed] DataBinder.Eval alternative
I heard I should avoid use of DataBinder.Eval because of it's late
binding.
Now I'm trying to rewrite some code but not sure how. What I have is:
<%# DataBinder.Eval(Container.DataItem, "myDate", "{:D}" %>
I found a way to do the same without DataBinder.Eval but I think it is
also late-binding. Can somebody confirm?:
<%#
Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString
("d MMM yyy") %>
Is this way better than the DataBinder.Eval method? Or should I use the
ItemDataBound event in combination with the findcontrol
technique to get 30% performance gain?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
| [aspngspeed] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngspeed.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives
| [aspngspeed] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngspeed.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| Yannick Smits |
I think point 3 and 4 should be shifted.
-I get back a string format from my SQL Server (I couldn't get the DateTime format to work for a temporary table in a stored
procedure, only the nvarchar).
-Than I convert it to a DateTime format.
-Than I reconvert it to a string in the ("d MMM yyy") format.
It would be faster to get a DateTime from the SQL Server but I can't get that to work. The error that I get when I try this is:
"Cannot specify a column width on data type datetime."
This occurs when I try to fill the dataset like this:
myDataAdapter.Fill(myDataSet, "Guestbook");
hope this is not too off-topic..
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
"Susan Warren" <Click here to reveal e-mail address> wrote in message news:452626@aspngspeed...
This is essentially the same as the string I sent you, speed-wise. No
reflection here, which is the costly part of DataBinder.Eval. But the
efficiency may be a bit less than perfect. Your line of code does the
following:
1. casts the dataitem to type DataRowView:
(DataRowView)Container.DataItem)
2. accesses ["myDate"] via a named accessor. This return an
object
3. does a .ToString(format) on the object
up to this point it's equivalent to the String.Format variant I sent
below.
4. THEN your expression does a Covert.ToDateTime() --
why #4??? Are you after a value of type DateTime? If so, why not:
<%# (DateTime)((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"] %>
And skip the conversion to/from string altogether?
hth.
Susan
-----Original Message-----
From: Yannick Smits [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 7:10 AM
To: aspngspeed
Subject: [aspngspeed] Re: DataBinder.Eval alternative
Thanks Susan, but what about:
<%#
Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString
("d MMM yyy") %>
Is it slow too? Or is it just the DataBinder.Eval that is slow?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
"Susan Warren" <Click here to reveal e-mail address> wrote in message
news:452582@aspngspeed...
If you want avoid the reflection cost of DataBinder.Eval, try this:
<%# String.Format("{0:D}",((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"])
%>
-----Original Message-----
From: Yannick Smits [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:44 AM
To: aspngspeed
Subject: [aspngspeed] DataBinder.Eval alternative
I heard I should avoid use of DataBinder.Eval because of it's late
binding.
Now I'm trying to rewrite some code but not sure how. What I have is:
<%# DataBinder.Eval(Container.DataItem, "myDate", "{:D}" %>
I found a way to do the same without DataBinder.Eval but I think it is
also late-binding. Can somebody confirm?:
<%#
Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString
("d MMM yyy") %>
Is this way better than the DataBinder.Eval method? Or should I use the
ItemDataBound event in combination with the findcontrol
technique to get 30% performance gain?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
| [aspngspeed] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngspeed.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives
| [aspngspeed] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngspeed.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| Susan Warren |
Oops, yep, you're right. So your code and mine are essentially
equivalent.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yannick Smits [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 8:01 AM
To: aspngspeed
Subject: [aspngspeed] Re: DataBinder.Eval alternative
I think point 3 and 4 should be shifted.
-I get back a string format from my SQL Server (I couldn't get the
DateTime format to work for a temporary table in a stored
procedure, only the nvarchar).
-Than I convert it to a DateTime format.
-Than I reconvert it to a string in the ("d MMM yyy") format.
It would be faster to get a DateTime from the SQL Server but I can't get
that to work. The error that I get when I try this is:
"Cannot specify a column width on data type datetime."
This occurs when I try to fill the dataset like this:
myDataAdapter.Fill(myDataSet, "Guestbook");
hope this is not too off-topic..
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
"Susan Warren" <Click here to reveal e-mail address> wrote in message
news:452626@aspngspeed...
This is essentially the same as the string I sent you, speed-wise. No
reflection here, which is the costly part of DataBinder.Eval. But the
efficiency may be a bit less than perfect. Your line of code does the
following:
1. casts the dataitem to type DataRowView:
(DataRowView)Container.DataItem)
2. accesses ["myDate"] via a named accessor. This return an
object
3. does a .ToString(format) on the object
up to this point it's equivalent to the String.Format variant I sent
below.
4. THEN your expression does a Covert.ToDateTime() --
why #4??? Are you after a value of type DateTime? If so, why not:
<%# (DateTime)((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"] %>
And skip the conversion to/from string altogether?
hth.
Susan
-----Original Message-----
From: Yannick Smits [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 7:10 AM
To: aspngspeed
Subject: [aspngspeed] Re: DataBinder.Eval alternative
Thanks Susan, but what about:
<%#
Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString
("d MMM yyy") %>
Is it slow too? Or is it just the DataBinder.Eval that is slow?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
"Susan Warren" <Click here to reveal e-mail address> wrote in message
news:452582@aspngspeed...
If you want avoid the reflection cost of DataBinder.Eval, try this:
<%# String.Format("{0:D}",((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"])
%>
-----Original Message-----
From: Yannick Smits [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:44 AM
To: aspngspeed
Subject: [aspngspeed] DataBinder.Eval alternative
I heard I should avoid use of DataBinder.Eval because of it's late
binding.
Now I'm trying to rewrite some code but not sure how. What I have is:
<%# DataBinder.Eval(Container.DataItem, "myDate", "{:D}" %>
I found a way to do the same without DataBinder.Eval but I think it is
also late-binding. Can somebody confirm?:
<%#
Convert.ToDateTime(((DataRowView)Container.DataItem)["myDate"]).ToString
("d MMM yyy") %>
Is this way better than the DataBinder.Eval method? Or should I use the
ItemDataBound event in combination with the findcontrol
technique to get 30% performance gain?
Thanks,
Yannick Smits
| [aspngspeed] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngspeed.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives
| [aspngspeed] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngspeed.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives
| [aspngspeed] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngspeed.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BootFX
Reliable and powerful .NET application framework. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
