We are using xamarin forms with prism. We have simple pages with small amount of data to be displayed on each page and include simple calculations. We are using prism navigation service to navigate between pages. We are experiencing some latency from clicking a button to navigating to next page. Data is fetched inside OnNavigatedTo since navigation parameter changes the data. Can someone shed some light of why is there a latency, it is close 1+ second and sometimes 2 seconds.
Also, it seems like each page is getting rendered twice... Once before OnNaviagatedTo and then data changes. OnProperty or OnCollection changed is fired from within OnNavigatedTo and it seems to cause the rendering again.
Version 6.3.0 introduced the concept of OnNavigatingTo, while OnNavigatedTo has been around for a while. There is a distinct difference between the two. Understanding the order in which things occur should help you create a nicer user experience.
New Page is created
OnNavigatedFrom is called
OnNavigatingTo is called
New Page is pushed onto the Navigation Stack and becomes visible
OnNavigatedTo is called
Applications that have to reach out and fetch data can often experience latency issues because it takes time to reach out to the remote service and get the data we want and then parse that data into a usable object. This particular problem was one in which many developers wanted to cut down the demand on the UI with having to refresh as the bindings were being updated which led to the introduction of OnNavigatingTo.
While neither one will reduce network latency it gives you an ability to make the calling page enter an IsBusy state that may display some sort of loading icon which would then be updated to false when NavigateAsync completes and your new page is displayed already loaded.
Related
I have a question regarding report state and live updating in the app.
When I report a state from my server I expect to see changes in my thermostat without going to the main screen of the app and back into the thermostat. Now I have read many similar questions about this and I understand the app doesn't support updating the UI in real time with report state.
I also followed the codelabs tutorial on implementing a smart home action (https://codelabs.developers.google.com/codelabs/smarthome-washer/#0). With this implementation the UI updates as soon as report state is called, which is what I would expect.
Essentialy what I have done is just modify the codelabs example to work with express, and changed the washer to a thermostat. Also the report state returns status code 200.
So how come the UI is updated when using the demo implementation from codelabs, but not when I use my implementation? The code from codelabs runs on firebase while mine runs on an express instance on my laptop, maybe that's the problem?
Google Home App depends on various components for updating the state in the UI, including query and report state responses. You should make sure that you are able to respond to queries successfully as well as doing report state.
You can make sure both your report state and query responses are functional by using Test Suite. In case your report states are shown as having errors there, you can also use the Home Graph Viewer to see the states of your devices in Homegraph.
I have a little issue with a form in a delphy XE2 application:
It's an old issue on this application and i have begin to work on it just since a little time.
When the user choose to launch the process with a button's event, my application launch a connexion with an OPCServer , an SQLServer and construct the form for a good following of data take on the tow servers.
The construction of my form involves a blockage of the interface (for approximately 15 sec) because of lot's of data which are necessary for make it.
When it freeze, if the user want drag the form, she go far away, and usually with the TMainMenu which go out of the screen. After that, it's impossible to use the application because we can't drag and we need to close and re-open.
In the old version, the form be already construct before the connexion. So the modification for a dynamic form isn't in link with this issue.
Life of my event :
-Open connexion with OPC Server
-Open SQL Connexion
-Send SQL Command Text
-FieldByName('') for update my UI (Button.Caption// TPage.TStaticText.Caption // TPage.Label1.Caption)
-FieldByName('') for update an array of record
-Close SQL Connexion
-Open SQL Connexion
-Send SQL CommandText
-FieldByName('') for update an other array of record
-Panel.Visible(false)
-TPage.Panel.Show;
-TPage.Panel.BringToFront;
So I haven't MainForm modification can change its position.
I'm a young developer, so I don't know why it moving and what I can make for repair that...
If you want a part of code, ask me what and i edit this, it's very long and i don't want spam answer.
Thank's for read.
The core of your problem is that you have a lengthy process (form construction) which completely blocks the main thread so your application isn't able to process normal Windows messages at the same time. That is why when you move your application it doesn't properly update its interface.
Now based on your description you already have this form construction process split into multiple steps so you could call Application.ProcessMessages between them.
This will force your application to update its UI part.
But beware calling Application.ProcessMessages often could hurt your application performance quite a bit. Why? It is usually a lengthy process because it forces your application to process all the messages that are in its queue.
Normally not all of these messages get processed as soon as they arrive. Windows groups them in the message queue by their priority list, making sure that high priority messages like WM_PAINT are processed as soon as possible while some other low priority messages like demand for application to respond to OS so that OS can see if the application is still working are mostly processed when application is idle or when they are in queue for certain amount of time.
So that is why Application.ProcessMessages can be so slow as it forces your application to process all messages regardless of their priority.
Also bear in mind that using Application.ProcessMessages can in certain scenarios actually become a bit dangerous.
Let me give you an example:
Lets say that clicking on a button starts a lengthy job which can take some time to finish. Now in order to allow your form to be updated you call Application.ProcessMessages in certain intervals. So far it is all good. But what happens if user clicks on that button again?
Since you are calling Application.ProcessMessages which forces your application to process all the messages and since clicking on button creates a MouseClick message which then fires buttons OnClick event which then executes the OnClick method that has been assigned to buttons OnClick event in the end this will cause the same method that was executed on first button click to be executed again.
So now you have this method partially done from first button click and same method executing again for second mouse click. Now the method that was executed from the second click will finish first and then the method that was started from first button click but was interrupted with Application.ProcessMessages handling the second button click will continue its execution to the end.
This all can lead to strange bugs which are hard to track, because you as a programmer normally don't predict that your end user might have clicked the button twice.
So to avoid this I strongly recommend you implement some safeguard mechanisms to prevent such scenarios by temporarily disabling a button for instance.
But the best solution is always to show your user that your application is working which in most cases will dissuade them from clicking the button again, but unfortunately not always.
You should also take a good care when dynamically constructing a form to enable the controls only after all of the controls have been successfully constructed. Failing to do so the user might click on one of your controls and that control could attempt to access some other control which hasn't yet been created at the time. The result hard to track bug which causes Access Violation.
You might also consider showing a splash screen at start instead of half built form. Why?
For once it is much nicer to see and it tells your users to wait a bit. And for second having main form hidden until it is fully created makes sure that user won't be doing any clicks on it prematurely.
Did anyone hear about asynchronous executing of an EF query?
I want my items control to be filled right when the form loads and the user should be able to view the list while the rest of the items are still being loaded.
Maybe by auto-splitting the execution in bulks of items (i.e. few queries for each execution) all in same connection.
I posted a feature suggestion to Microsoft, please share them with your ideas as well.
Not wanting to sound like a commercial, but I noticed that the latest DevExpress grid gives features like this in their WPF grid. Essentially you want to load visible-count items first, then load the rest in a background thread so your UI isn't freezing up. The background thread should probably load another page at a time and make them available to the UI thread.
It's something you would want to think about carefully and make sure you get it right, or simply buy a control that does the hard work for you.
I take from your link that this is a web app. Is that correct?
A Query must complete and return data before rendering can begin. An EF feature will not help you here. Rather. look at breaking up your process into several processes that can be done at once.
Keep in mind that ASP.NET cannot return a response to a browser if it is not done rendering the HTML.
Let me assume you are executing a single query, getting the results back and displaying them to a page.
Best option: Page your results. if you Have 4000 records, show the first 50. If you show 200+ records to a user, They cannot digest that much information.
If that does not fit your needs, look at firing one query for 50 results. Make an Ajax call to the the remaining records and build the UI from there, in (reasonably sized) chunks.
I'd like to integrate something like a welcome panel (welcome screen) into our iPhone application to inform our users about updates and new offers when they launch the application. I have the following thoughts and doubts:
No user input required
Shows generic HTML without any action from the user point of view, the thing closes after 2 or 3 secs and has a close button if you want to close it manually. This is for advertising and tips.
This should be very simple to implement
User input required
Shows generic HTML with an action required from the user point of view, for example a survey. The user should be able to skip it
same as above, but is it possible that the user submits something on a HTML page and that causes also something to happen within the iPhone app (maybe via Java Script)? For example the user submits a survey on the HTML page and then app closes the current screen and continues to the next screen (i.e. the real application)?
Is it also possible to receive parameters (e.g. an ID) via a HTML website? e.g. if the user receives an offer on the HTML welcome panel, then he clicks on it and it takes him directly to a screen in the iPhone app with content loaded from a server (via JSON) depening on the offer id retrieved through the HTML page.
We prefer implementing it via HTML, because it gives us more flexibility. But I'm also open to hear other suggestions.
Thanks
Rengers answer is the correct one to accomplish what you want. However, the real correct answer is "Don't do that in the first place."
From a design perspective, a "Welcome Panel" or any kind of startup/splash-screen is a bad idea and the Apple Documentation tells you explicitly not to use them. Even for games, they're a bad idea that should be avoided if possible.
It's not a "Welcome Panel" it's a "wade-through-all-our-marketing-crap-before-you-can-actually-use-our-app" panel.
Mobile apps aren't like apps for regular platforms. Non-mobile hardware is faster so the obtrusive startup screens load faster and can be dismissed faster. Non-mobile apps tend to accomplish many task and people use them sitting down for prolonged periods. Users will tolerate a few seconds wasted clicking through startup screens so they can get into an app they will use for many minutes or even hours.
By contrast, mobile apps are often used by people on the go and in a hurry. The apps are small and ideally perform a single task. As quickly as possible, people need to be able to get into the app, perform what ever task the app accomplishes and then get back out again. If you're only using an app each time for 30 seconds or so, having to spend 5 seconds each time wading through startup screens is massively annoying.
Mobil hardware is slower and operations can take longer. Depending on its complexity and resources an app can take as much as 10 seconds to launch. In your case you want to add to a startup screen that has to load, connect to a url, display and then have the user perform an operation. That will take another 5-10 seconds minimum. So you're looking at users having to spend 20 seconds or more just getting into your app.
That doesn't sound like much but try mocking up your app and then using it on the go i.e. while walking, waiting for an elevator, going up the stairs, waiting for a red light etc. Test it in social situations. In the middle of conversation say, "Let me check on that" then take out the iPhone launch your app and try to get some information from it. 20 seconds becomes a very long time in all these circumstances.
Even shorter launch times are very annoying if you have to take some action every single time you open the app just to get to the functional part of the app. It's arguably even worse to spring a startup screen on them intermittently so they never know when they open your app how long it will take to get in it. User surprise is not good design.
Instead of forcing users to do something, you should embed advertisements and update notices unobtrusively in the app itself so that people can see them while they are using the app. In the case of advertising, this has the added advantage of putting the adds in view the entire time the user is looking at the app.
I don't know how many times some idiot from marketing has come in and started a feature request with, "We need to force the user to..." The only response to those types of request is to set the marketing weeny on fire. Do that several times and they'll stop trying to systematically alienate your customers.
UIWebViewDelegate has a method that allows you to respond to interaction in a HTML page:
- (BOOL)webView:(UIWebView *)webView shouldStartLoadWithRequest:(NSURLRequest *)request navigationType:(UIWebViewNavigationType)navigationType
Using this, you can catch any links clicked and respond to them in your application by presenting a different view.
Recieving parameters like an id can be done in a few different ways.
1) You can parse the HTML and determine it from the source.
2) You can have a javascript function in the HTML that returns the id. Call it by using
- (NSString *)stringByEvaluatingJavaScriptFromString:(NSString *)script
3) You can also use the delegate method I mentioned.
If you make a link like this: get offer you can catch it in the delegate and retrieve the id from the NSURLRequest.
I hope this will point you in the right direction.
If you do need some kind of startup screen a good option is to use the default.png. The app loads and displays that image before it does anything else.
It's usually used to display the illusion of the user interface before the UI loads completely. However, you could use it to display startup information. Since it displays almost instantly (within 1 sec) it does give your user something to look at while the app loads. In the case of a mock interface, it lets the user see the location of the interface elements and begin moving to activate them before the elements finish loading.
The catch is that the image disappears as soon as the first view loads so you have to load a view behind it that is a duplicate of the image (more ofter the image is screenshot of the view)
In your case you would need to dynamically generate the default.png when the web page updated. Upon launch it would display the information and buy the time the user read it, made a decision and touched the interface, the real web page would have replaced it.
Of course, this system won't work if you want new info at the start of each launch. Instead you'll have to generate the image during one run for use in the next.
In any case, if you launch into a web page the user did not select, I advise that you create a default.png that displays a message along the lines of "Checking for Updates and Info" (or whatever your doing) so the user won't think your app launched and hung.
A Wicket application serializes and caches all pages to support stateful components, as well as for supporting the back button, among other possible reasons. I have an application which uses setResponsePage to navigate from screen to screen. Over a pretty short amount of time the session gets rather large because all of the prior pages are stored in the session. For the most part, I only need the session to contain the current page, for obvious reasons, and perhaps the last 2 or 3 pages to allow easy navigation using the browser's back button.
Can I force a page to expire after I have navigated away from it and I know that I don't want to use to back button to that version of the page? More generally what is the recommended way to deal with session growth in Wicket?
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Wicket-Session-grows-too-big-real-fast-td1875816.html
If you use loads of domain objects on your page, which are eventually tightly coupled to other domain objects, be sure to avoid serialization for these!
Have a look at
LoadableDetachableModel for wrapping domaing objects
DataView and IDataProvider for displaying list of domain objects
Thou shalt not stuff domain objects into instance variables of components.
Thou shalt not make domain object references final in order to use them in anonymous subclasses.
Thou shalt not pass a mere List of domain objects to a ListView.
Perhaps, when subclassing WbeRequestCycle in your Application class, you might gain control of a page's lifetime in the pagemap... haven't tried it, though
In order to avoid Session choke due to continuous stacking of byte-stream due to serialization in a session and memory usage piling , you can use detachable models by using hooks to arrange for their own storage and restoration at the beginning of each request cycle , this way you have complete control over models containing byte-stream of pages not required in the session or navigable through 'Back' button.