+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000

  1. #1
    Alain79
    Guest

    Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000

    HI

    We are experimenting a consistant difference in real time behavior between
    Excel 2003 behaviour and Excel 2000 behaviour in front of the Group
    function...

    Using the exact same Excel file that have around 1000 lines with several
    level of grouping, the time needed to group under level 1 or 2 is around 2
    to 3 seconds with Excel 2000 while it is around 25 to 30 seconds with Excel
    2003. In both case the same function is quite immediat if we settle the
    calculation mode to manual...

    The same phenomenon can be seen if you ask for the group function on a file
    without any formulas while another big excel file with a lot of formulas is
    open at the same time but not active...

    Is there something different than the calculation mode that should be
    settled in Excel 2003 in order to get the same response time on group
    function than in Excel 200? Any other information, experience about that
    problem? Is it link to a different behavior of excel in front of calculation
    strategy?

    Thanks for your help
    Alain79



  2. #2
    keepITcool
    Guest

    Re: Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000

    Alan

    see
    http://www.decisionmodels.com/calcsecretsc.htm

    for the ins and outs of excel calculation.
    and the changes between versions.


    --
    keepITcool
    | www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam


    Alain79 wrote :

    > HI
    >
    > We are experimenting a consistant difference in real time behavior
    > between Excel 2003 behaviour and Excel 2000 behaviour in front of the
    > Group function...
    >
    > Using the exact same Excel file that have around 1000 lines with
    > several level of grouping, the time needed to group under level 1 or
    > 2 is around 2 to 3 seconds with Excel 2000 while it is around 25 to
    > 30 seconds with Excel 2003. In both case the same function is quite
    > immediat if we settle the calculation mode to manual...
    >
    > The same phenomenon can be seen if you ask for the group function on
    > a file without any formulas while another big excel file with a lot
    > of formulas is open at the same time but not active...
    >
    > Is there something different than the calculation mode that should be
    > settled in Excel 2003 in order to get the same response time on group
    > function than in Excel 200? Any other information, experience about
    > that problem? Is it link to a different behavior of excel in front of
    > calculation strategy?
    >
    > Thanks for your help
    > Alain79


  3. #3
    keepITcool
    Guest

    Re: Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000


    hmm..
    i was thinking

    check settings for display pagebreaks in both versions.
    visible pagebreaks can cause significant delays

    --
    keepITcool
    | www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam


    keepITcool wrote :

    > Alan
    >
    > see
    > http://www.decisionmodels.com/calcsecretsc.htm
    >
    > for the ins and outs of excel calculation.
    > and the changes between versions.
    >
    >
    > --
    > keepITcool
    > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam

    >
    >
    > Alain79 wrote :
    >
    > > HI
    > >
    > > We are experimenting a consistant difference in real time behavior
    > > between Excel 2003 behaviour and Excel 2000 behaviour in front of
    > > the Group function...
    > >
    > > Using the exact same Excel file that have around 1000 lines with
    > > several level of grouping, the time needed to group under level 1 or
    > > 2 is around 2 to 3 seconds with Excel 2000 while it is around 25 to
    > > 30 seconds with Excel 2003. In both case the same function is quite
    > > immediat if we settle the calculation mode to manual...
    > >
    > > The same phenomenon can be seen if you ask for the group function on
    > > a file without any formulas while another big excel file with a lot
    > > of formulas is open at the same time but not active...
    > >
    > > Is there something different than the calculation mode that should
    > > be settled in Excel 2003 in order to get the same response time on
    > > group function than in Excel 200? Any other information, experience
    > > about that problem? Is it link to a different behavior of excel in
    > > front of calculation strategy?
    > >
    > > Thanks for your help
    > > Alain79


  4. #4
    Alain79
    Guest

    Re: Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000

    FYI - Here is what suggested Dave Peterson on the same question placed in
    microsoft.public.excel.misc newsgroup
    Thanks to comment if possible
    If true, I am not that happy and should find if it is possible to intercept
    the grouping command...

    => Start of Dave suggestion...

    Just a guess...

    xl2003 added some options to the =subtotal() worksheet function.

    In earlier versions, =subtotal() would ignore the rows that were hidden by
    filtering (data|filter|autofilter for example).

    In xl2003, you can use =subtotal(10x,a1:a99) to ignore cells hidden
    manually.

    My bet is that is what causes excel to recalc.

    The only way around it (that I know) is to change the calculation mode
    before
    and after--or even interupt the calculation in mid stream. I hit the escape
    key
    to interupt that calculation.

    Excel will catch up when it can. Usually when I'm staring at the data and
    my
    fingers are off the keyboard/mouse. Watch the statusbar. If it says
    Calculate,
    excel hasn't finished.

    => End of Dave suggestion


    "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > hmm..
    > i was thinking
    >
    > check settings for display pagebreaks in both versions.
    > visible pagebreaks can cause significant delays
    >
    > --
    > keepITcool
    > | www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    >
    >
    > keepITcool wrote :
    >
    > > Alan
    > >
    > > see
    > > http://www.decisionmodels.com/calcsecretsc.htm
    > >
    > > for the ins and outs of excel calculation.
    > > and the changes between versions.
    > >
    > >
    > > --
    > > keepITcool
    > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam

    > >
    > >
    > > Alain79 wrote :
    > >
    > > > HI
    > > >
    > > > We are experimenting a consistant difference in real time behavior
    > > > between Excel 2003 behaviour and Excel 2000 behaviour in front of
    > > > the Group function...
    > > >
    > > > Using the exact same Excel file that have around 1000 lines with
    > > > several level of grouping, the time needed to group under level 1 or
    > > > 2 is around 2 to 3 seconds with Excel 2000 while it is around 25 to
    > > > 30 seconds with Excel 2003. In both case the same function is quite
    > > > immediat if we settle the calculation mode to manual...
    > > >
    > > > The same phenomenon can be seen if you ask for the group function on
    > > > a file without any formulas while another big excel file with a lot
    > > > of formulas is open at the same time but not active...
    > > >
    > > > Is there something different than the calculation mode that should
    > > > be settled in Excel 2003 in order to get the same response time on
    > > > group function than in Excel 200? Any other information, experience
    > > > about that problem? Is it link to a different behavior of excel in
    > > > front of calculation strategy?
    > > >
    > > > Thanks for your help
    > > > Alain79




  5. #5
    keepITcool
    Guest

    Re: Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000

    hmm

    changing the outlinelevel doesnot trigger a recalc....
    but indeed in xl2003 changing SHOWLEVELS does trigger a recalc.
    (does not in xl97/xl2002)

    looks like your only recourse is to turnoff autocalculation

    Sub x()
    Dim lngCalc&
    With Application
    lngCalc = .Calculation
    .EnableEvents = False
    End With
    'Prep sheet
    Me.UsedRange.EntireRow.Delete
    [a1:a19].Value = 1
    [a20].FormulaR1C1 = "=subtotal(9,r1c:r19c)"
    Me.Calculate

    'Test calc MANUAL
    Application.Calculation = xlCalculationManual
    Application.EnableEvents = True

    'Set the level
    Debug.Print "Set levels MANUAL"
    [a1:a19].EntireRow.OutlineLevel = 2
    'Change display
    Debug.Print "Show levels MANUAL"
    Me.Outline.ShowLevels 1

    'now test AUTO
    With Application
    .EnableEvents = False
    .Calculation = xlCalculationAutomatic
    .EnableEvents = True
    End With

    'Set the level
    Debug.Print "Set levels AUTO"
    [a1:a19].EntireRow.OutlineLevel = 2
    'Change display
    Debug.Print "Show levels AUTO" 'TRIGGERS RECALC in xl2003
    Me.Outline.ShowLevels 1

    Debug.Print "Done"
    Application.Calculation = lngCalc

    End Sub

    Private Sub Worksheet_Calculate()
    Debug.Print "CALC!"
    End Sub




    --
    keepITcool
    | www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam


    Alain79 wrote :

    > FYI - Here is what suggested Dave Peterson on the same question
    > placed in microsoft.public.excel.misc newsgroup
    > Thanks to comment if possible
    > If true, I am not that happy and should find if it is possible to
    > intercept the grouping command...
    >
    > => Start of Dave suggestion...
    >
    > Just a guess...
    >
    > xl2003 added some options to the =subtotal() worksheet function.
    >
    > In earlier versions, =subtotal() would ignore the rows that were
    > hidden by filtering (data|filter|autofilter for example).
    >
    > In xl2003, you can use =subtotal(10x,a1:a99) to ignore cells hidden
    > manually.
    >
    > My bet is that is what causes excel to recalc.
    >
    > The only way around it (that I know) is to change the calculation mode
    > before
    > and after--or even interupt the calculation in mid stream. I hit the
    > escape key
    > to interupt that calculation.
    >
    > Excel will catch up when it can. Usually when I'm staring at the
    > data and my
    > fingers are off the keyboard/mouse. Watch the statusbar. If it says
    > Calculate,
    > excel hasn't finished.
    >
    > => End of Dave suggestion
    >
    >
    > "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > hmm..
    > > i was thinking
    > >
    > > check settings for display pagebreaks in both versions.
    > > visible pagebreaks can cause significant delays
    > >
    > > --
    > > keepITcool
    > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam

    > >
    > >
    > > keepITcool wrote :
    > >
    > > > Alan
    > > >
    > > > see
    > > > http://www.decisionmodels.com/calcsecretsc.htm
    > > >
    > > > for the ins and outs of excel calculation.
    > > > and the changes between versions.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > keepITcool
    > > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Alain79 wrote :
    > > >
    > > > > HI
    > > > >
    > > > > We are experimenting a consistant difference in real time
    > > > > behavior between Excel 2003 behaviour and Excel 2000 behaviour
    > > > > in front of the Group function...
    > > > >
    > > > > Using the exact same Excel file that have around 1000 lines with
    > > > > several level of grouping, the time needed to group under level
    > > > > 1 or 2 is around 2 to 3 seconds with Excel 2000 while it is
    > > > > around 25 to 30 seconds with Excel 2003. In both case the same
    > > > > function is quite immediat if we settle the calculation mode to
    > > > > manual...
    > > > >
    > > > > The same phenomenon can be seen if you ask for the group
    > > > > function on a file without any formulas while another big excel
    > > > > file with a lot of formulas is open at the same time but not
    > > > > active...
    > > > >
    > > > > Is there something different than the calculation mode that
    > > > > should be settled in Excel 2003 in order to get the same
    > > > > response time on group function than in Excel 200? Any other
    > > > > information, experience about that problem? Is it link to a
    > > > > different behavior of excel in front of calculation strategy?
    > > > >
    > > > > Thanks for your help
    > > > > Alain79


  6. #6
    Alain79
    Guest

    Re: Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000

    Thanks
    I have now writen my own show outline level program
    One question about one piece of your code that is:
    With Application
    lngCalc = .Calculation
    .EnableEvents = False
    End With
    What is the role of "Application.EnableEvents = False"
    Alain 79


    "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > hmm
    >
    > changing the outlinelevel doesnot trigger a recalc....
    > but indeed in xl2003 changing SHOWLEVELS does trigger a recalc.
    > (does not in xl97/xl2002)
    >
    > looks like your only recourse is to turnoff autocalculation
    >
    > Sub x()
    > Dim lngCalc&
    > With Application
    > lngCalc = .Calculation
    > .EnableEvents = False
    > End With
    > 'Prep sheet
    > Me.UsedRange.EntireRow.Delete
    > [a1:a19].Value = 1
    > [a20].FormulaR1C1 = "=subtotal(9,r1c:r19c)"
    > Me.Calculate
    >
    > 'Test calc MANUAL
    > Application.Calculation = xlCalculationManual
    > Application.EnableEvents = True
    >
    > 'Set the level
    > Debug.Print "Set levels MANUAL"
    > [a1:a19].EntireRow.OutlineLevel = 2
    > 'Change display
    > Debug.Print "Show levels MANUAL"
    > Me.Outline.ShowLevels 1
    >
    > 'now test AUTO
    > With Application
    > .EnableEvents = False
    > .Calculation = xlCalculationAutomatic
    > .EnableEvents = True
    > End With
    >
    > 'Set the level
    > Debug.Print "Set levels AUTO"
    > [a1:a19].EntireRow.OutlineLevel = 2
    > 'Change display
    > Debug.Print "Show levels AUTO" 'TRIGGERS RECALC in xl2003
    > Me.Outline.ShowLevels 1
    >
    > Debug.Print "Done"
    > Application.Calculation = lngCalc
    >
    > End Sub
    >
    > Private Sub Worksheet_Calculate()
    > Debug.Print "CALC!"
    > End Sub
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > keepITcool
    > | www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    >
    >
    > Alain79 wrote :
    >
    > > FYI - Here is what suggested Dave Peterson on the same question
    > > placed in microsoft.public.excel.misc newsgroup
    > > Thanks to comment if possible
    > > If true, I am not that happy and should find if it is possible to
    > > intercept the grouping command...
    > >
    > > => Start of Dave suggestion...
    > >
    > > Just a guess...
    > >
    > > xl2003 added some options to the =subtotal() worksheet function.
    > >
    > > In earlier versions, =subtotal() would ignore the rows that were
    > > hidden by filtering (data|filter|autofilter for example).
    > >
    > > In xl2003, you can use =subtotal(10x,a1:a99) to ignore cells hidden
    > > manually.
    > >
    > > My bet is that is what causes excel to recalc.
    > >
    > > The only way around it (that I know) is to change the calculation mode
    > > before
    > > and after--or even interupt the calculation in mid stream. I hit the
    > > escape key
    > > to interupt that calculation.
    > >
    > > Excel will catch up when it can. Usually when I'm staring at the
    > > data and my
    > > fingers are off the keyboard/mouse. Watch the statusbar. If it says
    > > Calculate,
    > > excel hasn't finished.
    > >
    > > => End of Dave suggestion
    > >
    > >
    > > "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > >
    > > > hmm..
    > > > i was thinking
    > > >
    > > > check settings for display pagebreaks in both versions.
    > > > visible pagebreaks can cause significant delays
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > keepITcool
    > > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > keepITcool wrote :
    > > >
    > > > > Alan
    > > > >
    > > > > see
    > > > > http://www.decisionmodels.com/calcsecretsc.htm
    > > > >
    > > > > for the ins and outs of excel calculation.
    > > > > and the changes between versions.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > --
    > > > > keepITcool
    > > > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > Alain79 wrote :
    > > > >
    > > > > > HI
    > > > > >
    > > > > > We are experimenting a consistant difference in real time
    > > > > > behavior between Excel 2003 behaviour and Excel 2000 behaviour
    > > > > > in front of the Group function...
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Using the exact same Excel file that have around 1000 lines with
    > > > > > several level of grouping, the time needed to group under level
    > > > > > 1 or 2 is around 2 to 3 seconds with Excel 2000 while it is
    > > > > > around 25 to 30 seconds with Excel 2003. In both case the same
    > > > > > function is quite immediat if we settle the calculation mode to
    > > > > > manual...
    > > > > >
    > > > > > The same phenomenon can be seen if you ask for the group
    > > > > > function on a file without any formulas while another big excel
    > > > > > file with a lot of formulas is open at the same time but not
    > > > > > active...
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Is there something different than the calculation mode that
    > > > > > should be settled in Excel 2003 in order to get the same
    > > > > > response time on group function than in Excel 200? Any other
    > > > > > information, experience about that problem? Is it link to a
    > > > > > different behavior of excel in front of calculation strategy?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Thanks for your help
    > > > > > Alain79




  7. #7
    keepITcool
    Guest

    Re: Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000



    it was only needed to demonstrate that the calculation event
    occured when setting ShowLevels and to suppress the debug line
    when adding data or changing calculation mode.



    --
    keepITcool
    | www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam


    Alain79 wrote :

    > Thanks
    > I have now writen my own show outline level program
    > One question about one piece of your code that is:
    > With Application
    > lngCalc = .Calculation
    > .EnableEvents = False
    > End With
    > What is the role of "Application.EnableEvents = False"
    > Alain 79
    >
    >
    > "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > hmm
    > >
    > > changing the outlinelevel doesnot trigger a recalc....
    > > but indeed in xl2003 changing SHOWLEVELS does trigger a recalc.
    > > (does not in xl97/xl2002)
    > >
    > > looks like your only recourse is to turnoff autocalculation
    > >
    > > Sub x()
    > > Dim lngCalc&
    > > With Application
    > > lngCalc = .Calculation
    > > .EnableEvents = False
    > > End With
    > > 'Prep sheet
    > > Me.UsedRange.EntireRow.Delete
    > > [a1:a19].Value = 1
    > > [a20].FormulaR1C1 = "=subtotal(9,r1c:r19c)"
    > > Me.Calculate
    > >
    > > 'Test calc MANUAL
    > > Application.Calculation = xlCalculationManual
    > > Application.EnableEvents = True
    > >
    > > 'Set the level
    > > Debug.Print "Set levels MANUAL"
    > > [a1:a19].EntireRow.OutlineLevel = 2
    > > 'Change display
    > > Debug.Print "Show levels MANUAL"
    > > Me.Outline.ShowLevels 1
    > >
    > > 'now test AUTO
    > > With Application
    > > .EnableEvents = False
    > > .Calculation = xlCalculationAutomatic
    > > .EnableEvents = True
    > > End With
    > >
    > > 'Set the level
    > > Debug.Print "Set levels AUTO"
    > > [a1:a19].EntireRow.OutlineLevel = 2
    > > 'Change display
    > > Debug.Print "Show levels AUTO" 'TRIGGERS RECALC in xl2003
    > > Me.Outline.ShowLevels 1
    > >
    > > Debug.Print "Done"
    > > Application.Calculation = lngCalc
    > >
    > > End Sub
    > >
    > > Private Sub Worksheet_Calculate()
    > > Debug.Print "CALC!"
    > > End Sub
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > --
    > > keepITcool
    > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam

    > >
    > >
    > > Alain79 wrote :
    > >
    > > > FYI - Here is what suggested Dave Peterson on the same question
    > > > placed in microsoft.public.excel.misc newsgroup
    > > > Thanks to comment if possible
    > > > If true, I am not that happy and should find if it is possible to
    > > > intercept the grouping command...
    > > >
    > > > => Start of Dave suggestion...
    > > >
    > > > Just a guess...
    > > >
    > > > xl2003 added some options to the =subtotal() worksheet function.
    > > >
    > > > In earlier versions, =subtotal() would ignore the rows that were
    > > > hidden by filtering (data|filter|autofilter for example).
    > > >
    > > > In xl2003, you can use =subtotal(10x,a1:a99) to ignore cells
    > > > hidden manually.
    > > >
    > > > My bet is that is what causes excel to recalc.
    > > >
    > > > The only way around it (that I know) is to change the calculation
    > > > mode before
    > > > and after--or even interupt the calculation in mid stream. I hit
    > > > the escape key
    > > > to interupt that calculation.
    > > >
    > > > Excel will catch up when it can. Usually when I'm staring at the
    > > > data and my
    > > > fingers are off the keyboard/mouse. Watch the statusbar. If it
    > > > says Calculate,
    > > > excel hasn't finished.
    > > >
    > > > => End of Dave suggestion
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > >
    > > > > hmm..
    > > > > i was thinking
    > > > >
    > > > > check settings for display pagebreaks in both versions.
    > > > > visible pagebreaks can cause significant delays
    > > > >
    > > > > --
    > > > > keepITcool
    > > > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > keepITcool wrote :
    > > > >
    > > > > > Alan
    > > > > >
    > > > > > see
    > > > > > http://www.decisionmodels.com/calcsecretsc.htm
    > > > > >
    > > > > > for the ins and outs of excel calculation.
    > > > > > and the changes between versions.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > --
    > > > > > keepITcool
    > > > > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Alain79 wrote :
    > > > > >
    > > > > > > HI
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > We are experimenting a consistant difference in real time
    > > > > > > behavior between Excel 2003 behaviour and Excel 2000
    > > > > > > behaviour in front of the Group function...
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Using the exact same Excel file that have around 1000 lines
    > > > > > > with several level of grouping, the time needed to group
    > > > > > > under level 1 or 2 is around 2 to 3 seconds with Excel 2000
    > > > > > > while it is around 25 to 30 seconds with Excel 2003. In
    > > > > > > both case the same function is quite immediat if we settle
    > > > > > > the calculation mode to manual...
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > The same phenomenon can be seen if you ask for the group
    > > > > > > function on a file without any formulas while another big
    > > > > > > excel file with a lot of formulas is open at the same time
    > > > > > > but not active...
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Is there something different than the calculation mode that
    > > > > > > should be settled in Excel 2003 in order to get the same
    > > > > > > response time on group function than in Excel 200? Any other
    > > > > > > information, experience about that problem? Is it link to a
    > > > > > > different behavior of excel in front of calculation
    > > > > > > strategy?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Thanks for your help
    > > > > > > Alain79


  8. #8
    Alain79
    Guest

    Re: Time needed for the group function: big diff between Excel2003 and Excel2000

    I have finaly added some more commands to my application
    Those commands being
    => show level 1
    => show level 2
    => show level 3
    => show level 4
    => show all lines

    and the basic code behind is
    Sub ShowChapterLevel_subroutine(Level As Integer)
    Application.ScreenUpdating = False
    Application.Calculation = xlCalculationManual
    ActiveSheet.Outline.ShowLevels Level
    Application.ScreenUpdating = True
    Selection.Activate
    Selection.Show
    Application.Calculation = xlCalculationAutomatic
    End Sub

    Thanks for yor help
    Alain


    "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    >
    > it was only needed to demonstrate that the calculation event
    > occured when setting ShowLevels and to suppress the debug line
    > when adding data or changing calculation mode.
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > keepITcool
    > | www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    >
    >
    > Alain79 wrote :
    >
    > > Thanks
    > > I have now writen my own show outline level program
    > > One question about one piece of your code that is:
    > > With Application
    > > lngCalc = .Calculation
    > > .EnableEvents = False
    > > End With
    > > What is the role of "Application.EnableEvents = False"
    > > Alain 79
    > >
    > >
    > > "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > hmm
    > > >
    > > > changing the outlinelevel doesnot trigger a recalc....
    > > > but indeed in xl2003 changing SHOWLEVELS does trigger a recalc.
    > > > (does not in xl97/xl2002)
    > > >
    > > > looks like your only recourse is to turnoff autocalculation
    > > >
    > > > Sub x()
    > > > Dim lngCalc&
    > > > With Application
    > > > lngCalc = .Calculation
    > > > .EnableEvents = False
    > > > End With
    > > > 'Prep sheet
    > > > Me.UsedRange.EntireRow.Delete
    > > > [a1:a19].Value = 1
    > > > [a20].FormulaR1C1 = "=subtotal(9,r1c:r19c)"
    > > > Me.Calculate
    > > >
    > > > 'Test calc MANUAL
    > > > Application.Calculation = xlCalculationManual
    > > > Application.EnableEvents = True
    > > >
    > > > 'Set the level
    > > > Debug.Print "Set levels MANUAL"
    > > > [a1:a19].EntireRow.OutlineLevel = 2
    > > > 'Change display
    > > > Debug.Print "Show levels MANUAL"
    > > > Me.Outline.ShowLevels 1
    > > >
    > > > 'now test AUTO
    > > > With Application
    > > > .EnableEvents = False
    > > > .Calculation = xlCalculationAutomatic
    > > > .EnableEvents = True
    > > > End With
    > > >
    > > > 'Set the level
    > > > Debug.Print "Set levels AUTO"
    > > > [a1:a19].EntireRow.OutlineLevel = 2
    > > > 'Change display
    > > > Debug.Print "Show levels AUTO" 'TRIGGERS RECALC in xl2003
    > > > Me.Outline.ShowLevels 1
    > > >
    > > > Debug.Print "Done"
    > > > Application.Calculation = lngCalc
    > > >
    > > > End Sub
    > > >
    > > > Private Sub Worksheet_Calculate()
    > > > Debug.Print "CALC!"
    > > > End Sub
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > keepITcool
    > > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Alain79 wrote :
    > > >
    > > > > FYI - Here is what suggested Dave Peterson on the same question
    > > > > placed in microsoft.public.excel.misc newsgroup
    > > > > Thanks to comment if possible
    > > > > If true, I am not that happy and should find if it is possible to
    > > > > intercept the grouping command...
    > > > >
    > > > > => Start of Dave suggestion...
    > > > >
    > > > > Just a guess...
    > > > >
    > > > > xl2003 added some options to the =subtotal() worksheet function.
    > > > >
    > > > > In earlier versions, =subtotal() would ignore the rows that were
    > > > > hidden by filtering (data|filter|autofilter for example).
    > > > >
    > > > > In xl2003, you can use =subtotal(10x,a1:a99) to ignore cells
    > > > > hidden manually.
    > > > >
    > > > > My bet is that is what causes excel to recalc.
    > > > >
    > > > > The only way around it (that I know) is to change the calculation
    > > > > mode before
    > > > > and after--or even interupt the calculation in mid stream. I hit
    > > > > the escape key
    > > > > to interupt that calculation.
    > > > >
    > > > > Excel will catch up when it can. Usually when I'm staring at the
    > > > > data and my
    > > > > fingers are off the keyboard/mouse. Watch the statusbar. If it
    > > > > says Calculate,
    > > > > excel hasn't finished.
    > > > >
    > > > > => End of Dave suggestion
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > "keepITcool" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > > >
    > > > > > hmm..
    > > > > > i was thinking
    > > > > >
    > > > > > check settings for display pagebreaks in both versions.
    > > > > > visible pagebreaks can cause significant delays
    > > > > >
    > > > > > --
    > > > > > keepITcool
    > > > > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > keepITcool wrote :
    > > > > >
    > > > > > > Alan
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > see
    > > > > > > http://www.decisionmodels.com/calcsecretsc.htm
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > for the ins and outs of excel calculation.
    > > > > > > and the changes between versions.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > --
    > > > > > > keepITcool
    > > > > > > > www.XLsupport.com | keepITcool chello nl | amsterdam
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Alain79 wrote :
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > HI
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > We are experimenting a consistant difference in real time
    > > > > > > > behavior between Excel 2003 behaviour and Excel 2000
    > > > > > > > behaviour in front of the Group function...
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Using the exact same Excel file that have around 1000 lines
    > > > > > > > with several level of grouping, the time needed to group
    > > > > > > > under level 1 or 2 is around 2 to 3 seconds with Excel 2000
    > > > > > > > while it is around 25 to 30 seconds with Excel 2003. In
    > > > > > > > both case the same function is quite immediat if we settle
    > > > > > > > the calculation mode to manual...
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > The same phenomenon can be seen if you ask for the group
    > > > > > > > function on a file without any formulas while another big
    > > > > > > > excel file with a lot of formulas is open at the same time
    > > > > > > > but not active...
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Is there something different than the calculation mode that
    > > > > > > > should be settled in Excel 2003 in order to get the same
    > > > > > > > response time on group function than in Excel 200? Any other
    > > > > > > > information, experience about that problem? Is it link to a
    > > > > > > > different behavior of excel in front of calculation
    > > > > > > > strategy?
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Thanks for your help
    > > > > > > > Alain79




+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 1