Kenneth Jackson
Top achievements
Rank 1
Rank 1
Kenneth Jackson
asked on 01 Jan 2008, 12:16 PM
Will future releases of the Telerik controls allow binary serialization of their collections and items making those collections.
Currently neither items nor item collections of any of the controls i've used
seem to be marked for serialization. Binary serialization allows a more
complete form of data persistence as well as allowing developers to add
customisation that we may need to our own serialization in addition to that.
The current xml serialization does not allow for any customisation and also
lacks a considerable number of object parameters that it currently serializes.
Could future releases pls allow nodes/node collections , listbox items and collections , combobox items and collections and all other control items and their collections to be marked for serialization.
Currently neither items nor item collections of any of the controls i've used
seem to be marked for serialization. Binary serialization allows a more
complete form of data persistence as well as allowing developers to add
customisation that we may need to our own serialization in addition to that.
The current xml serialization does not allow for any customisation and also
lacks a considerable number of object parameters that it currently serializes.
Could future releases pls allow nodes/node collections , listbox items and collections , combobox items and collections and all other control items and their collections to be marked for serialization.
3 Answers, 1 is accepted
0
Hi Kenneth Jackson,
Thank you for writing.
We will add extensible (binary) serialization to our TODO list. However, there are many other tasks with higher priority so I cannot give you a precise timeframe at the moment.
It will be helpful if you share additional details about your scenario and how it will benefit from serialization. Suggestions and ideas regarding serialization are most welcome.
Please contact us again if you have any additional questions.
All the best,
Jordan
the Telerik team
Instantly find answers to your questions at the new Telerik Support Center
Thank you for writing.
We will add extensible (binary) serialization to our TODO list. However, there are many other tasks with higher priority so I cannot give you a precise timeframe at the moment.
It will be helpful if you share additional details about your scenario and how it will benefit from serialization. Suggestions and ideas regarding serialization are most welcome.
Please contact us again if you have any additional questions.
All the best,
Jordan
the Telerik team
Instantly find answers to your questions at the new Telerik Support Center
0
Kenneth Jackson
Top achievements
Rank 1
Rank 1
answered on 08 Jan 2008, 07:39 PM
Mainly I need to store various types of objects in the tag object
it may be basic structs/classes/collections and i would like to be able
to serialize them regardless of their structure.
Which is why i'm querying
for binary serialization as that's the most versatile and ultimately complete.
Atm for example I am unable to store any structured object with a string
value in it or a basic string in the tag data even if the structured object
implements ISerializable as the basic string type does not.
The string data type in my experience is probably the most used form of
storage in the tag object and certainly the most useful / versatile but invariably
people will store objects of some type rather than basic data types in the tag
object.
The string data I need to store comes from a database and is used to build
possibly very complex "Toolboxes" for each user.
Users want to be able to make extensive customisations which would start taking 30 seconds plus just to populate if the database is needed and the data returned is then still further queried for specifics.
So we want to create a cache per user that will simply
query the database for versioning of the data and if its the same, simply load
from the disk cache. This is ideal as most of the data will remain static on the database and versions would be very sparse and few in between.
Thus making the interface an almost instantaneous startup even with a high
level of customisation. Without it the interface always needs to be rebuilt
because all that can be stored is the caption of each node as far as data
is concerned.
it may be basic structs/classes/collections and i would like to be able
to serialize them regardless of their structure.
Which is why i'm querying
for binary serialization as that's the most versatile and ultimately complete.
Atm for example I am unable to store any structured object with a string
value in it or a basic string in the tag data even if the structured object
implements ISerializable as the basic string type does not.
The string data type in my experience is probably the most used form of
storage in the tag object and certainly the most useful / versatile but invariably
people will store objects of some type rather than basic data types in the tag
object.
The string data I need to store comes from a database and is used to build
possibly very complex "Toolboxes" for each user.
Users want to be able to make extensive customisations which would start taking 30 seconds plus just to populate if the database is needed and the data returned is then still further queried for specifics.
So we want to create a cache per user that will simply
query the database for versioning of the data and if its the same, simply load
from the disk cache. This is ideal as most of the data will remain static on the database and versions would be very sparse and few in between.
Thus making the interface an almost instantaneous startup even with a high
level of customisation. Without it the interface always needs to be rebuilt
because all that can be stored is the caption of each node as far as data
is concerned.
0
Hi Kenneth Jackson,
Thank you for writing. The information that you shared will be of great help.
From the scenario that you are describing it sounds like that a custom implementation will be more suitable for your needs, at least for the time being.
If you have any additional questions, please contact us.
Best wishes,
Jordan
the Telerik team
Instantly find answers to your questions at the new Telerik Support Center
Thank you for writing. The information that you shared will be of great help.
From the scenario that you are describing it sounds like that a custom implementation will be more suitable for your needs, at least for the time being.
If you have any additional questions, please contact us.
Best wishes,
Jordan
the Telerik team
Instantly find answers to your questions at the new Telerik Support Center