-
October 12th, 2007, 07:31 AM
#7
That with a couple of other changes helped in bringing down the cpu usage from 90% to 40%. Even a page that works with VisualTable takes same amount of cpu. But the memory usage was about 20% better than the NonVisualTable approach.
But I still feel 40% cpu usage on the client side is bad in either approaches. What could be wrong?
Similar Threads
-
By Hammer7 in forum Client SDKs
Replies: 1
Last Post: August 16th, 2010, 09:31 AM
-
By giangum in forum Client SDKs
Replies: 1
Last Post: September 1st, 2009, 09:20 AM
-
By riwang in forum Client SDKs
Replies: 3
Last Post: May 21st, 2009, 09:37 AM
-
By rsouissi in forum Adapter SDKs
Replies: 7
Last Post: December 11th, 2006, 09:26 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:23 PM.
Bookmarks