[SOLVED] Repeaterfield in backend extremly slow

[Klenkes]

For a school project I want to list all teachers on a page with their names, subjects and email addresses.

I created 3 inputs, put them in a repeaterfield and created approx. 50 entries with teachers.(but only 5 email addresses)

Frontend is rocketlike fast but in the backend the page takes more than 10 seconds to load AND save.

I know, repeaterfields are not meant to hold large amount of content, but 50 entries? Not that much.

The page in Admin -> Repeaters says under: Process "0" Is that correct?

Or is that behavior normal for a repeater field?

PW 2.7.0
Repeater 1.0.2

Edited August 6, 2016 by Klenkes
Topic solved with PW 3.0.29

[Martijn Geerts]

What kind of fields do you have in those repeaters ?

is 'names' maybe a select field, where it has to load all values of that select ? And if so, try to use autocomplete.

[Klenkes]

The 3 fields were all input type text and like: John Smith for a name ant the second field like : D, E. Third field was supposed to hold the emailaddress but was almost empty for all the entries.

I couldn't find a solution to the problem so I got rid of the repeater field and created the content with pages. Which is PWs strength anyway.

But thanks.

[adrian]

You may potentially want to revisit repeaters now that they are collapsed by default and AJAX loaded - there should be no more performance issues:

https://processwire.com/blog/posts/more-repeaters-repeater-matrix-and-new-field-rendering/

Although to be honest I still think I would use pages for a staff directory because I like being able to have a direct URL to each staff member.

[Klenkes]

Ajaxloaded repeaters sound interesting!

And you are right. If possible, pages are the way to go.

Nevertheless I was eager to know why I didn't work for me. So I tested it on an old PW 2.6.1 install and it worked fine and fast. Approx. 3 seconds to save.

Then I upgraded to PW 2.7.0 and the same page took 12 seconds to save!

40 repeaters each with 3 simple text fields of text like names.

Strange.

[OLSA]

Nevertheless I was eager to know why I didn't work for me. So I tested it on an old PW 2.6.1 install and it worked fine and fast. Approx. 3 seconds to save.

Then I upgraded to PW 2.7.0 and the same page took 12 seconds to save!

40 repeaters each with 3 simple text fields of text like names.

Strange.

I have the same problem, PW 2.7.0 very slow in backend (>25 sec.) when editing or save (Win7, Wamp, PHP 5.4).

Regards.

[adrian]

Have either of you tried 2.7.2 (current stable) or 2.7.3 (current dev)?

If there is no improvement I would be curious what happens in PW 3.x but it still might be worth filing a Github issue to get the 2.x branch fixed.

[Klenkes]

Updating to PW 2.7.2 didn't change anything.

[Klenkes]

If there is no improvement I would be curious what happens in PW 3.x ...

I just recreated the setup in DEV 3.0.5. Same fields(3 input type text) in a repeater, 40 entries = 120 fields

With the standard options for repeater fields:

Repeater item visibility in editor

  New items open, existing items collapsed (recommended for most cases)

Repeater dynamic loading (AJAX) in editor

  Existing and new items (recommended, especially for repeaters that might have LOTS of items)

PW 3.0.5 opens and saves the page 30% faster. Which is in my case 7-8 seconds instead of 12 seconds. I think, that's okay.

BTW... the new repeaters are great! Making entries hidden is a great feature!

[krisj]

7-8 seconds is still a very long time to save a page.

[Klenkes]

I just updated an installation on a remote server from 3.0.18 to 3.0.29 and the repeater now works fast as hell! Whatever changed since 3.0.18... it fixed it at least for me.

40 entries, each with 2 textfields and 1 URL field took 7-8 seconds(3.0.18) and now only 1s 

[adrian]

4 hours ago, Klenkes said:

Whatever changed since 3.0.18

Maybe this: https://processwire.com/blog/posts/upgrades-optimizations-pw-3.0.22/#major-optimizations-to-inputfield-forms