8.28 KB, application/zip
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530 BuildID: 2002053012 Mozilla takes much time to render a table with 150 rows & 3 columns in each row. I'm new to mozilla & I found IE 6.0 does this much faster. Is there any way to improve the rendering capability in mozilla. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.Make a table of more than 150 rows & 3 columns. 2.Each cell of table should be having text boxes or comobo boxes. 3.
XP Apps is really for things _outside_ the content area. ;) I'll try to do a profile of this on Monday.
Assignee: sgehani → karnaze
Component: XP Apps → HTMLTables
QA Contact: paw → amar
Whiteboard: Profile of testcase needed
Sorry for selecting XP Apps, actually I didn't select anything there, the default was selected. Once again, sorry for providing wrong information, my problem is in the content area itself - Slow in rendering large tablesd especially with combo boxes or text boxes inside...
(The sample page is a 398k file containing a table of ~150 rows, with one checkbox and option form control on each row.) related: bug 141572 bug 39573, also bug 97927 bug 54542
Attachment #88758 - Attachment mime type: text/html → application/zip
Ok... That test page renders in about 2sec here. Is IE6 faster than that? The profile shows nothing useful; mostly us reading it off the disk....
After initial loading of http://www-courses.cs.uiuc.edu/~cs311/schedule.html, redrawing with the page-up/page-down keys is very slow, perhaps 2 or 3 seconds compared to almost instantly with IE 5.0. This is with Mozilla 1.1final on Windows 2000.
WFM, 2002-09-27-08 trunk Linux. I see no perf problems on any testcase/URL here.
I dont see any problem with the performace in rendering the given URL. It takes less than 2 sec to render the given URL On WIN2K. Build: 2002-10-21-08-trunk. Marking WFM
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.