UNSOLVED

SidBord

updated

23 years ago

S

SidBord

2 Intern

•

261 Posts

0

10750

May 3rd, 2004 17:00

Question About Setting Chart Limits & Memory Efficiency

Suppose I am using the following chart "Series" formula:

=Series(,SheetNm!$A$1:$A$300,SheetNm!$B$1:$B$300,1)

Because column "A" contains dates that are going to increase forever,
choosing row 300 is fine as long as the most recent date is stored in, say, row 50. In other words, I won't have to change the end limit for the chart from 300 to something larger for a long time.
My question has to do with the effects of changing the end limit to something really large, say, 5000, when I won't be using row 5000 for a long time from now. Will I use a lot more memory by choosing 5000 instead of 300, even though the data currently ends in row 50? What is the down side of choosing a large end limit when it is not currently needed?
  • abach

    1728 Posts

    337

    0

    Posted May 5th, 2004 12:00

    Try the following:

    Choose Insert, Name, Define
    Enter ChartA Data as the name
    In the Refers to field, type the following:

    =OFFSET(Sheet1!$A$1,0,0,COUNTA(Sheet1!$A:$A),1)

    Click OK

    You could repeat this for Column B, naming it ChartB

    To use this, refer to the Name in your formula. For example, =SUM(ChartA) will sum the non-empty cells in column A.

    Though this does not give you the exact answer, I hope it points you in the right direction.

  • JRosenfeld

    2 Intern

    •

    4383 Posts

    337

    0

    Posted May 5th, 2004 20:00

    You might also look at making a dynamic chart, for example

    'Graph only the data that are currently available from a data set that will continue to grow'

    http://www.tushar-mehta.com/index.html?http://www.tushar-mehta.com/excel/newsgroups/dynamic_charts/

    There are other references and tutorials if you google for Excel dynamic chart

  • SidBord

    2 Intern

    •

    261 Posts

    337

    0

    Posted May 5th, 2004 21:00

    I do that in some cases where it's convenient, but that doesn't answer my question. Thanx anyway.
  • SidBord

    2 Intern

    •

    261 Posts

    337

    0

    Posted May 5th, 2004 21:00

    I do that too, where acceptable, but that also doesn't answer my question.
    I didn't ask for a work around. My question has to do with the costs (if any) of using a very large limit before I need it. Thanx for the reply.
  • abach

    1728 Posts

    337

    0

    Posted May 5th, 2004 23:00

    Short of using an array formula, I see no reason why the suggestion would be too memory intensive.

    I'm sorry I did not reply to the nature of memory. I saw your example and posted what I considered a more efficient method.


  • SidBord

    2 Intern

    •

    261 Posts

    337

    0

    Posted May 6th, 2004 16:00

    Thanx for the reply. I guess it's just in the nature of a programmer to try to understand how someone else's program works. I just envision that a large maximum limit would maybe cause a lot of memory to be reserved to accommodate any values that might show up in that range. But what do I know? A really slick program could examine the slots following the last used slot and determine if there is any data or not that needs to be stored, then ignore all the emptys. But that's just wishful thinking. You see, I have conditions now and then in which neither of the suggested work arounds are appropriate. So for those charts I wind up having to change the upper limits about every two or three months. It's a nuisance, but I can do it. (Sigh)