-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.5k
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
Add pagination for account history + transactions to improve performance #739
Comments
@jakubkottnauer got it, thanks for looking into this. I'm thinking we'll eventually need some pagination since many credit card accounts will have thousands of transactions in a short time-span, but this could be a good temporary fix if we want to make these rows more of a "read only" row for now. |
@zachgoll I agree we definitely want pagination here to improve the UX. Though I don't think pagination should be used as a bandaid over performance issues - there's no excuse for the page not being able to handle couple of thousands entries, computers are fast enough 😄 In fact, I'll have a PR coming out in a few moments that fixes the perf problems by moving the category menu content into a turbo frame |
I think we can close this since #782 drastically improves the performance of large transaction lists. We can re-introduce pagination as a dedicated feature once we have some designs for it. |
Can confirm it's now much better 👍 Nice work @jakubkottnauer |
Where did this bug occur?
Describe the bug
There is currently no pagination on the account page which means that it becomes very slow to load when you have a higher number of transactions. Wrote a script to import some transactions from my bank (~1.4k) and it made it so slow that I had to restart the app to get to another page.
To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
Expected behavior
Use pagination to prevent long loading times.
Screenshots / Recordings
If applicable, add screenshots or short video recordings to help show the bug in more detail.
Additional context
Realize this is in between a bug and a feature request.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: