innerHTML size limit












1















I want to use AJAX to load an htmlfile into a <div> I will then need to run jsMath on this. Everything I have done so far with innerHTML has been a paragraph or two, maybe a table and/or image. Nothing too fancy.



What potential problems may occur when I set innerHTML to an external 25k file, with all sorts of complex css formatting? (thanks to jsMath) I can't think of any other method of doing this, but need to know if there are any limitations.



Thanks in advance.



--Dave










share|improve this question


















  • 1





    Just a reminder, you should accept answers to your questions. It's the SO way.

    – Justin Johnson
    Jan 13 '10 at 2:36
















1















I want to use AJAX to load an htmlfile into a <div> I will then need to run jsMath on this. Everything I have done so far with innerHTML has been a paragraph or two, maybe a table and/or image. Nothing too fancy.



What potential problems may occur when I set innerHTML to an external 25k file, with all sorts of complex css formatting? (thanks to jsMath) I can't think of any other method of doing this, but need to know if there are any limitations.



Thanks in advance.



--Dave










share|improve this question


















  • 1





    Just a reminder, you should accept answers to your questions. It's the SO way.

    – Justin Johnson
    Jan 13 '10 at 2:36














1












1








1








I want to use AJAX to load an htmlfile into a <div> I will then need to run jsMath on this. Everything I have done so far with innerHTML has been a paragraph or two, maybe a table and/or image. Nothing too fancy.



What potential problems may occur when I set innerHTML to an external 25k file, with all sorts of complex css formatting? (thanks to jsMath) I can't think of any other method of doing this, but need to know if there are any limitations.



Thanks in advance.



--Dave










share|improve this question














I want to use AJAX to load an htmlfile into a <div> I will then need to run jsMath on this. Everything I have done so far with innerHTML has been a paragraph or two, maybe a table and/or image. Nothing too fancy.



What potential problems may occur when I set innerHTML to an external 25k file, with all sorts of complex css formatting? (thanks to jsMath) I can't think of any other method of doing this, but need to know if there are any limitations.



Thanks in advance.



--Dave







javascript ajax innerhtml






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Dec 24 '09 at 1:00









the Hampsterthe Hampster

6061119




6061119








  • 1





    Just a reminder, you should accept answers to your questions. It's the SO way.

    – Justin Johnson
    Jan 13 '10 at 2:36














  • 1





    Just a reminder, you should accept answers to your questions. It's the SO way.

    – Justin Johnson
    Jan 13 '10 at 2:36








1




1





Just a reminder, you should accept answers to your questions. It's the SO way.

– Justin Johnson
Jan 13 '10 at 2:36





Just a reminder, you should accept answers to your questions. It's the SO way.

– Justin Johnson
Jan 13 '10 at 2:36












6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















4














I don't know about any browser specific size limits, but if you assign a string longer that 65536, Chrome splits it into many elem.childNodes, so you might have to loop over these nodes and concatenate them.



Run the below snipped in Chrome Dev Tools. It constructs a 160 k string, but theDivElement.childNodes[0] gets clipped to 65536 chars.



var longString = '1234567890';
for (var i = 0; i < 14; ++i) {
longString = longString + longString;
}
console.log('The length of our long string: ' + longString.length);
var elem = document.createElement('div');
elem.innerHTML = longString;
var innerHtmlValue = elem.childNodes[0].nodeValue;
console.log('The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: ' + innerHtmlValue.length);
console.log('Num child nodes: ' + elem.childNodes.length);


Result: (Chrome version 39.0.2171.95 (64-bit), Linux Mint 17)



The length of our long string: 163840
The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 65536
Num child nodes: 3


But in Firefox innerHTML doesn't split the contents into many nodes: (FF version 34.0, Linux Mint 17)



"The length of our long string: 163840"
"The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 163840"
"Num child nodes: 1"


So you'd need to take into account that different browsers handle childNodes differently, and perhaps iterate over all child nodes and concatenate. (I noticed this, because I tried to use innerHTML to unescape a > 100k HTML encoded string.)



In fact, in Firefox I can create an innerHTML-childNodes[0] of length 167 772 160, by looping to i < 24 above. But somewhere above this lenght, there is an InternalError: allocation size overflow error.






share|improve this answer


























  • Instead of iterating over all child nodes, we can call node.normalize() method.

    – Kevin Yue
    Dec 27 '18 at 5:43



















1














There's nothing to prevent you from doing this technically. The biggest issue will be page load time. Be sure to include some sort of indication that the data is loading or it will look like nothing's happening.






share|improve this answer































    1














    In the application I am currently working on, I have not had any problems in any browser setting innerHTML to a string of 30k or more. (Don't know what the limit is)






    share|improve this answer































      0














      The only kind of limits that are on this type of thing are purely bandwidth and processor related. You should make sure you don't have a low timeout set on your ajax request. You should also test on some lower speed computers to see if there is a memory issue. Some old browsers can be pretty unforgiving of large objects in memory.






      share|improve this answer































        0














        You'll probably want to profile this with a tool like dynatrace ajax or speed tracer to understand how setting innerHTML to a really huge value affects performance. You might want to compare it with another approach like putting the new content in an iframe, or paginating the content.






        share|improve this answer
























        • I hadn't thought of that <i>per se</i> I'm using AJAX to decide between Chapter 6 review, Chapter 7 review etc, but I hadn't thought to split each review up. Thanks

          – the Hampster
          Dec 24 '09 at 4:41



















        0














        your limit will be most likely the download limit set from your web server. usually a couple of MBs.Several web frameworks allows increasing this size but you cant just do that because that would mean increase buffer size which is not a good thing.






        share|improve this answer























          Your Answer






          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          });
          });
          }, "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "1"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f1956170%2finnerhtml-size-limit%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes








          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4














          I don't know about any browser specific size limits, but if you assign a string longer that 65536, Chrome splits it into many elem.childNodes, so you might have to loop over these nodes and concatenate them.



          Run the below snipped in Chrome Dev Tools. It constructs a 160 k string, but theDivElement.childNodes[0] gets clipped to 65536 chars.



          var longString = '1234567890';
          for (var i = 0; i < 14; ++i) {
          longString = longString + longString;
          }
          console.log('The length of our long string: ' + longString.length);
          var elem = document.createElement('div');
          elem.innerHTML = longString;
          var innerHtmlValue = elem.childNodes[0].nodeValue;
          console.log('The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: ' + innerHtmlValue.length);
          console.log('Num child nodes: ' + elem.childNodes.length);


          Result: (Chrome version 39.0.2171.95 (64-bit), Linux Mint 17)



          The length of our long string: 163840
          The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 65536
          Num child nodes: 3


          But in Firefox innerHTML doesn't split the contents into many nodes: (FF version 34.0, Linux Mint 17)



          "The length of our long string: 163840"
          "The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 163840"
          "Num child nodes: 1"


          So you'd need to take into account that different browsers handle childNodes differently, and perhaps iterate over all child nodes and concatenate. (I noticed this, because I tried to use innerHTML to unescape a > 100k HTML encoded string.)



          In fact, in Firefox I can create an innerHTML-childNodes[0] of length 167 772 160, by looping to i < 24 above. But somewhere above this lenght, there is an InternalError: allocation size overflow error.






          share|improve this answer


























          • Instead of iterating over all child nodes, we can call node.normalize() method.

            – Kevin Yue
            Dec 27 '18 at 5:43
















          4














          I don't know about any browser specific size limits, but if you assign a string longer that 65536, Chrome splits it into many elem.childNodes, so you might have to loop over these nodes and concatenate them.



          Run the below snipped in Chrome Dev Tools. It constructs a 160 k string, but theDivElement.childNodes[0] gets clipped to 65536 chars.



          var longString = '1234567890';
          for (var i = 0; i < 14; ++i) {
          longString = longString + longString;
          }
          console.log('The length of our long string: ' + longString.length);
          var elem = document.createElement('div');
          elem.innerHTML = longString;
          var innerHtmlValue = elem.childNodes[0].nodeValue;
          console.log('The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: ' + innerHtmlValue.length);
          console.log('Num child nodes: ' + elem.childNodes.length);


          Result: (Chrome version 39.0.2171.95 (64-bit), Linux Mint 17)



          The length of our long string: 163840
          The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 65536
          Num child nodes: 3


          But in Firefox innerHTML doesn't split the contents into many nodes: (FF version 34.0, Linux Mint 17)



          "The length of our long string: 163840"
          "The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 163840"
          "Num child nodes: 1"


          So you'd need to take into account that different browsers handle childNodes differently, and perhaps iterate over all child nodes and concatenate. (I noticed this, because I tried to use innerHTML to unescape a > 100k HTML encoded string.)



          In fact, in Firefox I can create an innerHTML-childNodes[0] of length 167 772 160, by looping to i < 24 above. But somewhere above this lenght, there is an InternalError: allocation size overflow error.






          share|improve this answer


























          • Instead of iterating over all child nodes, we can call node.normalize() method.

            – Kevin Yue
            Dec 27 '18 at 5:43














          4












          4








          4







          I don't know about any browser specific size limits, but if you assign a string longer that 65536, Chrome splits it into many elem.childNodes, so you might have to loop over these nodes and concatenate them.



          Run the below snipped in Chrome Dev Tools. It constructs a 160 k string, but theDivElement.childNodes[0] gets clipped to 65536 chars.



          var longString = '1234567890';
          for (var i = 0; i < 14; ++i) {
          longString = longString + longString;
          }
          console.log('The length of our long string: ' + longString.length);
          var elem = document.createElement('div');
          elem.innerHTML = longString;
          var innerHtmlValue = elem.childNodes[0].nodeValue;
          console.log('The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: ' + innerHtmlValue.length);
          console.log('Num child nodes: ' + elem.childNodes.length);


          Result: (Chrome version 39.0.2171.95 (64-bit), Linux Mint 17)



          The length of our long string: 163840
          The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 65536
          Num child nodes: 3


          But in Firefox innerHTML doesn't split the contents into many nodes: (FF version 34.0, Linux Mint 17)



          "The length of our long string: 163840"
          "The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 163840"
          "Num child nodes: 1"


          So you'd need to take into account that different browsers handle childNodes differently, and perhaps iterate over all child nodes and concatenate. (I noticed this, because I tried to use innerHTML to unescape a > 100k HTML encoded string.)



          In fact, in Firefox I can create an innerHTML-childNodes[0] of length 167 772 160, by looping to i < 24 above. But somewhere above this lenght, there is an InternalError: allocation size overflow error.






          share|improve this answer















          I don't know about any browser specific size limits, but if you assign a string longer that 65536, Chrome splits it into many elem.childNodes, so you might have to loop over these nodes and concatenate them.



          Run the below snipped in Chrome Dev Tools. It constructs a 160 k string, but theDivElement.childNodes[0] gets clipped to 65536 chars.



          var longString = '1234567890';
          for (var i = 0; i < 14; ++i) {
          longString = longString + longString;
          }
          console.log('The length of our long string: ' + longString.length);
          var elem = document.createElement('div');
          elem.innerHTML = longString;
          var innerHtmlValue = elem.childNodes[0].nodeValue;
          console.log('The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: ' + innerHtmlValue.length);
          console.log('Num child nodes: ' + elem.childNodes.length);


          Result: (Chrome version 39.0.2171.95 (64-bit), Linux Mint 17)



          The length of our long string: 163840
          The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 65536
          Num child nodes: 3


          But in Firefox innerHTML doesn't split the contents into many nodes: (FF version 34.0, Linux Mint 17)



          "The length of our long string: 163840"
          "The length as innerHTML-childNodes[0]: 163840"
          "Num child nodes: 1"


          So you'd need to take into account that different browsers handle childNodes differently, and perhaps iterate over all child nodes and concatenate. (I noticed this, because I tried to use innerHTML to unescape a > 100k HTML encoded string.)



          In fact, in Firefox I can create an innerHTML-childNodes[0] of length 167 772 160, by looping to i < 24 above. But somewhere above this lenght, there is an InternalError: allocation size overflow error.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Dec 18 '14 at 12:06

























          answered Dec 18 '14 at 11:33









          KajMagnusKajMagnus

          5,90975596




          5,90975596













          • Instead of iterating over all child nodes, we can call node.normalize() method.

            – Kevin Yue
            Dec 27 '18 at 5:43



















          • Instead of iterating over all child nodes, we can call node.normalize() method.

            – Kevin Yue
            Dec 27 '18 at 5:43

















          Instead of iterating over all child nodes, we can call node.normalize() method.

          – Kevin Yue
          Dec 27 '18 at 5:43





          Instead of iterating over all child nodes, we can call node.normalize() method.

          – Kevin Yue
          Dec 27 '18 at 5:43













          1














          There's nothing to prevent you from doing this technically. The biggest issue will be page load time. Be sure to include some sort of indication that the data is loading or it will look like nothing's happening.






          share|improve this answer




























            1














            There's nothing to prevent you from doing this technically. The biggest issue will be page load time. Be sure to include some sort of indication that the data is loading or it will look like nothing's happening.






            share|improve this answer


























              1












              1








              1







              There's nothing to prevent you from doing this technically. The biggest issue will be page load time. Be sure to include some sort of indication that the data is loading or it will look like nothing's happening.






              share|improve this answer













              There's nothing to prevent you from doing this technically. The biggest issue will be page load time. Be sure to include some sort of indication that the data is loading or it will look like nothing's happening.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Dec 24 '09 at 1:04









              Alex ReisnerAlex Reisner

              23.7k54951




              23.7k54951























                  1














                  In the application I am currently working on, I have not had any problems in any browser setting innerHTML to a string of 30k or more. (Don't know what the limit is)






                  share|improve this answer




























                    1














                    In the application I am currently working on, I have not had any problems in any browser setting innerHTML to a string of 30k or more. (Don't know what the limit is)






                    share|improve this answer


























                      1












                      1








                      1







                      In the application I am currently working on, I have not had any problems in any browser setting innerHTML to a string of 30k or more. (Don't know what the limit is)






                      share|improve this answer













                      In the application I am currently working on, I have not had any problems in any browser setting innerHTML to a string of 30k or more. (Don't know what the limit is)







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Dec 24 '09 at 1:05









                      Roland BoumanRoland Bouman

                      24.6k55360




                      24.6k55360























                          0














                          The only kind of limits that are on this type of thing are purely bandwidth and processor related. You should make sure you don't have a low timeout set on your ajax request. You should also test on some lower speed computers to see if there is a memory issue. Some old browsers can be pretty unforgiving of large objects in memory.






                          share|improve this answer




























                            0














                            The only kind of limits that are on this type of thing are purely bandwidth and processor related. You should make sure you don't have a low timeout set on your ajax request. You should also test on some lower speed computers to see if there is a memory issue. Some old browsers can be pretty unforgiving of large objects in memory.






                            share|improve this answer


























                              0












                              0








                              0







                              The only kind of limits that are on this type of thing are purely bandwidth and processor related. You should make sure you don't have a low timeout set on your ajax request. You should also test on some lower speed computers to see if there is a memory issue. Some old browsers can be pretty unforgiving of large objects in memory.






                              share|improve this answer













                              The only kind of limits that are on this type of thing are purely bandwidth and processor related. You should make sure you don't have a low timeout set on your ajax request. You should also test on some lower speed computers to see if there is a memory issue. Some old browsers can be pretty unforgiving of large objects in memory.







                              share|improve this answer












                              share|improve this answer



                              share|improve this answer










                              answered Dec 24 '09 at 1:06









                              Alex SextonAlex Sexton

                              9,76812339




                              9,76812339























                                  0














                                  You'll probably want to profile this with a tool like dynatrace ajax or speed tracer to understand how setting innerHTML to a really huge value affects performance. You might want to compare it with another approach like putting the new content in an iframe, or paginating the content.






                                  share|improve this answer
























                                  • I hadn't thought of that <i>per se</i> I'm using AJAX to decide between Chapter 6 review, Chapter 7 review etc, but I hadn't thought to split each review up. Thanks

                                    – the Hampster
                                    Dec 24 '09 at 4:41
















                                  0














                                  You'll probably want to profile this with a tool like dynatrace ajax or speed tracer to understand how setting innerHTML to a really huge value affects performance. You might want to compare it with another approach like putting the new content in an iframe, or paginating the content.






                                  share|improve this answer
























                                  • I hadn't thought of that <i>per se</i> I'm using AJAX to decide between Chapter 6 review, Chapter 7 review etc, but I hadn't thought to split each review up. Thanks

                                    – the Hampster
                                    Dec 24 '09 at 4:41














                                  0












                                  0








                                  0







                                  You'll probably want to profile this with a tool like dynatrace ajax or speed tracer to understand how setting innerHTML to a really huge value affects performance. You might want to compare it with another approach like putting the new content in an iframe, or paginating the content.






                                  share|improve this answer













                                  You'll probably want to profile this with a tool like dynatrace ajax or speed tracer to understand how setting innerHTML to a really huge value affects performance. You might want to compare it with another approach like putting the new content in an iframe, or paginating the content.







                                  share|improve this answer












                                  share|improve this answer



                                  share|improve this answer










                                  answered Dec 24 '09 at 1:13









                                  AnnieAnnie

                                  6,4311827




                                  6,4311827













                                  • I hadn't thought of that <i>per se</i> I'm using AJAX to decide between Chapter 6 review, Chapter 7 review etc, but I hadn't thought to split each review up. Thanks

                                    – the Hampster
                                    Dec 24 '09 at 4:41



















                                  • I hadn't thought of that <i>per se</i> I'm using AJAX to decide between Chapter 6 review, Chapter 7 review etc, but I hadn't thought to split each review up. Thanks

                                    – the Hampster
                                    Dec 24 '09 at 4:41

















                                  I hadn't thought of that <i>per se</i> I'm using AJAX to decide between Chapter 6 review, Chapter 7 review etc, but I hadn't thought to split each review up. Thanks

                                  – the Hampster
                                  Dec 24 '09 at 4:41





                                  I hadn't thought of that <i>per se</i> I'm using AJAX to decide between Chapter 6 review, Chapter 7 review etc, but I hadn't thought to split each review up. Thanks

                                  – the Hampster
                                  Dec 24 '09 at 4:41











                                  0














                                  your limit will be most likely the download limit set from your web server. usually a couple of MBs.Several web frameworks allows increasing this size but you cant just do that because that would mean increase buffer size which is not a good thing.






                                  share|improve this answer




























                                    0














                                    your limit will be most likely the download limit set from your web server. usually a couple of MBs.Several web frameworks allows increasing this size but you cant just do that because that would mean increase buffer size which is not a good thing.






                                    share|improve this answer


























                                      0












                                      0








                                      0







                                      your limit will be most likely the download limit set from your web server. usually a couple of MBs.Several web frameworks allows increasing this size but you cant just do that because that would mean increase buffer size which is not a good thing.






                                      share|improve this answer













                                      your limit will be most likely the download limit set from your web server. usually a couple of MBs.Several web frameworks allows increasing this size but you cant just do that because that would mean increase buffer size which is not a good thing.







                                      share|improve this answer












                                      share|improve this answer



                                      share|improve this answer










                                      answered Dec 24 '09 at 1:40









                                      Eugene RamirezEugene Ramirez

                                      1,56621515




                                      1,56621515






























                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded




















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f1956170%2finnerhtml-size-limit%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Costa Masnaga

                                          Fotorealismo

                                          Sidney Franklin