-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 675
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance #16279
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
zeusongit
merged 11 commits into
DynamoDS:master
from
RobertGlobant20:DYN-8801-UpdateLayout-PerformanceFinal
Jun 30, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
198543a
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance
RobertGlobant20 d1a86b4
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance
RobertGlobant20 c849206
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance Fixes
RobertGlobant20 02516ba
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance Fixes
RobertGlobant20 78ce781
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance Fixes
RobertGlobant20 e6d72f4
Merge branch 'master' into DYN-8801-UpdateLayout-PerformanceFinal
RobertGlobant20 8c22cc7
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance
RobertGlobant20 f29a25f
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance Fixing Regressions
RobertGlobant20 0954b90
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance
RobertGlobant20 17eb184
DYN-8801 UpdateLayout Performance Fix
RobertGlobant20 40b9959
Merge branch 'master' into DYN-8801-UpdateLayout-PerformanceFinal
RobertGlobant20 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need this extra dimension for borders? Can't we calculate borders based on node height and width? How and when are these 2 different?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The current nodeBorder is a WPF Border element added from row=1 to 5, column = 0 to 3 (NodeView has in total 6 rows and 3 columns) so based in that usually WPF Grids starts from row=0 you will notice by seeing the image below that the NodeView.Width, NodeView.Height (in green color) will not match NodeBorder.Width and NodeBorder.Height (the red rectangle), remember the nodeBorder is auto-calculated based in the content of row 1 to 5 and column 0 to 3.
Then when I was trying to reduce the calls to Measure() and Arrange() noticed that setting The NodeView size and setting the NodeBorder size reduced the total calls from 7 to 1 (due that probably when WPF is rendering the nodeBorder is increasing size several times due to the controls added in those specific rows, columns, so setting the size will avoid the extra calls to Measure).
One possible solution for not serializing the NodeBorder size could be setting the NodeBorder localtion from row 0 to 5 and column 0 to 3 but we will need to do several changes in NodeView.xaml (now that everything is in code behind in NodeView.xaml.cs) like Collapsing the customNodeBorders (instead of hiding them like currently is happening) and we will need to do testing in several nodes and custom nodes.