Comments on: Why ASP.NET AJAX UpdatePanels are dangerous

By: Presentation | Pearltrees

Presentation | Pearltrees — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 15:30:17 +0000

[...] Simple enough. Button1 is clicked, an asynchronous request is made for the current date/time, and that is displayed as Label1′s content. As simple as it sounds, take a look at the actual HTTP post and response necessary to accomplish the partial postback: protected void Button1_Click ( object sender, EventArgs e ) { Label1. Why ASP.NET AJAX UpdatePanels are dangerous » Encosia [...]

By: ASP.Net PageMethods: invocar código de servidor desde JavaScript « Nathan

ASP.Net PageMethods: invocar código de servidor desde JavaScript « Nathan — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 20:43:05 +0000

[...] http://encosia.com/why-aspnet-ajax-updatepanels-are-dangerous/#comment-63337 [...]

By: jhonatan

jhonatan — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 20:24:21 +0000

Check this post: http://jhonatantirado.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/asp-net-pagemethods-invocar-codigo-de-servidor-desde-javascript/
I replaced a GridView with a plain HTML-table, by iterating the JSON result (list of objects).

By: jhonatan

jhonatan — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 20:21:35 +0000

I care.
For a webform where you edit/update/insert only one register, UpdatePanels are OK.
But for showing a big amount of data (paged results) on a site with average 1000 concurrent users, PageMethods and JSON is the solution.
Replacing GridViews/UpdatePanels with a PageMethods/JSON solution, improved my site perfomance (because NO VIEWSTATE = less network traffic).

By: ASP.NET and Ajax. All about update panels, web methods, page methods and jQuery » Coding Still

Sun, 26 Feb 2012 14:16:21 +0000

[...] Why ASP.NET AJAX UpdatePanels are dangerous [...]

By: Dave Ward

Dave Ward — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:56:28 +0000

Yes, the WebForms Page model is optimized for rapid/easy development, not so much for performance at runtime.

If you use MVC, you can still do something very similar. You can have controller actions that don’t do anything but return some JSON, just like page methods and ScriptServices.

Either way, the key is to use light weight AJAX calls for small bits of information, instead of re-rendering the entire page on the server-side for every interaction.

By: Roberto Alessi

Roberto Alessi — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:51:18 +0000

So asp:Button with server side _onclick only for fast development of service pages (user membership management for example) and only web services/page methods for production pages.
I was only asking a confirmation for this radical change.
I have briefly look at MVC but IMHO is better to work by web services / page methods.
It is better to work only by web services ? or static page methods are acceptable for private routines that does not need to be public exposed ?
Thanks for your answer.

By: Dave Ward

Dave Ward — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 16:28:51 +0000

I would say that avoiding the WebForms Page life cycle is definitely key for scalability and performance. Another option, if you want to stay more on the server-side, is using ASP.NET MVC instead of ASP.NET WebForms.

By: Roberto Alessi

Roberto Alessi — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 18:13:15 +0000

So in a “real” high traffic site i shoud consider to work only by web services (.asmx files) ? throw away asp:Button with the “onclick” code behind ?

By: Dave Ward

Dave Ward — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 01:54:57 +0000

The best thing you can do is to move away from the postbacks instead of trying to work around them on the client-side. A postback is just as slow as the UpdatePanel. You can use jQuery to send objects to and from the server, client-side templating to handle rendering, etc. Relying on the server to drive client-side interaction will always be clunky and slow compared to doing it closer to the user (in the browser).

By: Sumant

Sumant — Mon, 26 Dec 2011 07:32:47 +0000

@Dave

Hi as i had posted this will probably solve my validation problem but do we have anything in jquery so that we can add controls to the page dynamically and i need asp.net controls to be added dynamically on click of a button,so that on postback i can all data from the controls.If you ahve any work around for this do post.

By: Dave Ward

Dave Ward — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 19:04:20 +0000

You can use the jQuery Validation plugin instead pretty easily: http://encosia.com/using-jquery-validation-with-asp-net-webforms/

That’s the approach ASP.NET is moving toward anyway. MVC 3 already uses jQuery Validation and I believe WebForms is moving that direction too in 4.5 or later, using the same unobtrusive wireup approach to bridge the gap between ASP.NET and the jQuery plugin automatically.

By: sumant

sumant — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 11:37:32 +0000

@Dave

I had a situation in my project where i had to add controls like textboxses and drop down lists dynamically to the page on the click of a button,i had the jquery clone method with which i could clone controls,but the issue was how could all the data on postback,also i had to apply validators to the dynamic content which was coming on the page,i not only used update panels but also asp.net validators for all controls and i was able to add validators as well as the controls to the page because of the update panel, i cannot see a solution in this case without a update panel,can you tell me how could i have used jquery in this case?

By: Dave Ward

Dave Ward — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 22:24:46 +0000

You can replace most UpdatePanels with just a few lines of jQuery, not hundreds. That doesn’t address the underlying inefficiency of the partial rendering approach when coupled with ASP.NET’s page life cycle though, so it’s really a moot point either way.

By: Dave Ward

Dave Ward — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 22:21:16 +0000

There’s no need to use alerts when you’re debugging JavaScript. Using a tool like Firebug or Chrome’s developer tools (and even IE9′s developer tools aren’t terrible) makes debugging JavaScript very similar to debugging server-side code. You can even debug JavaScript inside of Visual Studio in VS2010, though it’s a bit slower than using the tools built into browsers.