I/8054: Model#insertContent should use fewer operations #8773

niegowski · 2021-01-07T19:41:47Z

Suggested merge commit message (convention)

Other (engine): Optimized Model#insertContent() to use as few operations as possible to reduce the time needed to handle pasting large content into the editor. Closes #8054. Closes #715.

Additional information

…nserted in one operation.

scofalik

LGTM.

Minor comments mostly on code style and requests for better in-code comments.

I had some doubts but I think I eventually understood everything correctly. Please clarify where I commented.

scofalik · 2021-01-15T08:53:01Z

packages/ckeditor5-engine/src/model/utils/insertcontent.js

- handleNodes( nodes, parentContext ) {
- nodes = Array.from( nodes );
+ handleNodes( nodes ) {
+ for ( const node of Array.from( nodes ) ) {


If nodes param is iterable, you shouldn't need to make an array out of it.

Those nodes are inserted one by one to the temporary document fragment (it removes them from the original collection) so it invalidates the iterator.

scofalik · 2021-01-15T09:20:50Z

packages/ckeditor5-engine/src/model/utils/insertcontent.js

+ // <p>x^y</p> + <p>z</p> => <p>x</p>^<p>y</p> + <p>z</p> => <p>x</p><p>z</p><p>y</p> => <p>xz[]y</p>
+ // but:
+ // <p>x</p><p>^</p><p>z</p> + <p>y</p> => <p>x</p><p>y</p><p>z</p> (no merging)
+ // <p>x</p>[<img>]<p>z</p> + <p>y</p> => <p>x</p><p>y</p><p>z</p> (no merging, note: after running deleteContents


In Insertion constructor you only pass position. I am not sure if it makes sense to describe this scenario here. I understand that you wanted to show other examples but it might be even confusing.

This was moved from the previous location, I'll add this to one of the merging methods.

scofalik · 2021-01-15T10:51:36Z

packages/ckeditor5-engine/src/model/utils/insertcontent.js

+ if ( this._documentFragment.getChild( 0 ) == this._firstNode ) {
+ this.writer.insert( this._firstNode, this.position );
+ this.position = livePosition.toPosition();
+ }
+
+ // Insert the remaining nodes from document fragment.
+ if ( !this._documentFragment.isEmpty ) {
+ this.writer.insert( this._documentFragment, this.position );
+ }


Okay, so I finally understood that this whole fragment is like that so we have an insert operation only for the really first node that I ever inserted in the whole insertContent process, because only the first node can be merged.

I didn't understand why we check if if ( this._documentFragment.getChild( 0 ) == this._firstNode ) { instead of doing it always but then I realized that there can be multiple calls to _insertPartialFragment() during one insertion. But then I didn't understand why it always checks with the very first node, but now I understand that's because only the very first node can be merged.

Yeah this is optimal but a little confusing.

How about changing the comment to:

// If the very first node of the whole insertion process is inserted, insert it separately for OT reasons (undo). // Note: there can be multiple calls to `_insertPartialFragment()` during one insertion process. // Note: only the very first node can be merged so we have to do separate operation only for it.

scofalik · 2021-01-15T10:59:43Z

packages/ckeditor5-engine/src/model/utils/insertcontent.js


- this.writer.merge( mergePosLeft );
+ if ( this._firstNode === this._lastNode ) {
+ this._firstNode = this._lastNode = mergePosLeft.nodeBefore;


Please do it in two lines of code :).

But actually, I wonder... Why/when we want to change _firstNode? Isn't it that we want to merge only the very first node? Even if we do some splitting etc.?

Okay, I think I finally got it. Is it a case of:

A^A paste X A^A AXA AXA AXA

?

And in this case we would have keep references to wrong (removed due to merge) node.

I added a comment about that.

scofalik · 2021-01-15T11:29:13Z

packages/ckeditor5-engine/src/model/utils/insertcontent.js

+ // <p>x</p>[]<p>y</p> => <p>x[]</p><p>y</p>
+ this.position = Position._createAt( mergePosRight.nodeBefore, 'end' );
+
+ // OK: <p>xx[]</p> + <p>yy</p> => <p>xx[]yy</p> (when sticks to previous)


I know this is old comment, but I'd add this before it, because I didn't know what this example talks about:

// Explanation of setting position stickiness to `'toPrevious'`:

scofalik · 2021-01-15T11:30:18Z

packages/ckeditor5-engine/src/model/utils/insertcontent.js

+ // NOK: <p>xx[]</p> + <p>yy</p> => <p>xxyy[]</p> (when sticks to next)
+ const livePosition = LivePosition.fromPosition( this.position, 'toPrevious' );
+
+ // See comment above on moving `_affectedStart`.


Change this to "See comment in mergeSiblingsOfFirstNode() ...".

BTW. shouldn't this be called mergeSiblingOfFirstNode() (no "s") or simply mergeOnLeft()?

scofalik · 2021-01-15T11:39:45Z

Waiting for feedeback from @ckeditor/qa-team

Mgsy · 2021-01-15T13:35:55Z

I've found a regression in Track Changes:

Turn on track changes.
Create the following selection:

<paragraph>Something.</paragraph>
<paragraph>Somet[hing.</paragraph>
<blockquote>Somet]hing.</blockquote>

3. Copy it and paste at the end of the first paragraph.
4. Select all.
5. Delete.
6. Undo 2x.
7. Redo 2x.

ckeditorerror.js:64 Uncaught CKEditorError: model-createpositionat-offset-required
Read more: https://ckeditor.com/docs/ckeditor5/latest/framework/guides/support/error-codes.html#error-model-createpositionat-offset-required
    at Function._createAt (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:88090:11)
    at new Range (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:88382:66)
    at Range._getTransformedByMove (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:89193:17)
    at Range._getTransformedByMoveOperation (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:88975:15)
    at http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:85616:93
    at transform (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:84553:10)
    at transformSets (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:84788:19)
    at RedoCommand._undo (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:157104:138)
    at Object.callback (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:157208:9)
    at Model._runPendingChanges (http://localhost:8125/ckeditor5/external/collaboration-features/packages/ckeditor5-comments/tests/manual/annotations.js:81402:58)

niegowski · 2021-01-15T18:09:27Z

I've found a regression in Track Changes:

Turn on track changes.

Create the following selection:
<paragraph>Something.</paragraph>
<paragraph>Somet[hing.</paragraph>
<blockquote>Somet]hing.</blockquote>
Copy it and paste at the end of the first paragraph.

Select all.

Delete.

Undo 2x.

Redo 2x.

This was caused by a changed order of operations, before this change it was:

insert the first node
merge the first node with the previous one
insert the second node
merge the second node with the next one

In this PR:

insert the first node
insert the second node
merge the first node with the previous one
merge the second node with the next one

I've just pushed the fix for that and for other review comments.

scofalik · 2021-01-15T21:18:48Z

packages/ckeditor5-engine/src/model/utils/insertcontent.js

+ * <p>x^y</p> + <p>z</p> => <p>x</p>^<p>y</p> + <p>z</p> => <p>x</p><p>z</p><p>y</p> => <p>xz[]y</p>
+ * but:
+ * <p>x</p><p>^</p><p>z</p> + <p>y</p> => <p>x</p><p>y</p><p>z</p> (no merging)
+ * <p>x</p>[<img>]<p>z</p> + <p>y</p> => <p>x</p><p>y</p><p>z</p> (no merging, note: after running deleteContents


I still don't think this should be here. This is just incorrect example, it shouldn't be here. Insertion class does not operate on a range.

I think this whole comment (I mean all three examples without the last) should be somewhere else (handleNodes()? or Insertion class description?).

niegowski added 2 commits December 22, 2020 19:43

WIP insertContent batching to reduce number of created operations.

7bd2c5a

Added workaround for undoing insert + merge when multiple nodes are i…

74f1937

…nserted in one operation.

niegowski requested review from Reinmar and scofalik January 8, 2021 14:11

scofalik reviewed Jan 15, 2021

View reviewed changes

niegowski added 2 commits January 15, 2021 17:47

Merge branch 'master' into i/8054

fe6a8a4

Fixed issue with ordering the OT operations.

4451fcd

niegowski requested a review from scofalik January 15, 2021 18:11

scofalik reviewed Jan 15, 2021

View reviewed changes

Docs: Slight changes in API docs.

3644952

scofalik merged commit d97206c into master Jan 15, 2021

scofalik deleted the i/8054 branch January 15, 2021 22:15

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

I/8054: Model#insertContent should use fewer operations #8773

I/8054: Model#insertContent should use fewer operations #8773

niegowski commented Jan 7, 2021 •

edited

Loading

scofalik left a comment

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

niegowski Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

niegowski Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

niegowski Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

niegowski Jan 15, 2021

niegowski Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021 •

edited

Loading

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

niegowski Jan 15, 2021

scofalik commented Jan 15, 2021

Mgsy commented Jan 15, 2021 •

edited

Loading

niegowski commented Jan 15, 2021

scofalik Jan 15, 2021

I/8054: Model#insertContent should use fewer operations #8773

I/8054: Model#insertContent should use fewer operations #8773

Conversation

niegowski commented Jan 7, 2021 • edited Loading

Suggested merge commit message (convention)

Additional information

scofalik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

scofalik Jan 15, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

scofalik commented Jan 15, 2021

Mgsy commented Jan 15, 2021 • edited Loading

niegowski commented Jan 15, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

niegowski commented Jan 7, 2021 •

edited

Loading

scofalik Jan 15, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Mgsy commented Jan 15, 2021 •

edited

Loading