Iām surprised and, honestly, concerned that the only 2 options being considered are ādonāt store all the data in memoryā or āignore the memory usage problemā. Iām sure thereās room to optimize how the data is stored / handled in memory, based on my observations:
I imported my WorkFlowy outline and split it into 2 documents. When viewing the larger of the two, Dynalist uses 800MB of memory. The OPML export of my outline from WorkFlowy is 2.4MB. The export from Dynalist of the same outline is 3.5 MB uncompressed in OPML and 1.9 MB in text. Even with 2x or 3x encoding overhead, the outline data itself does not come close to accounting for 800MB of memory usage.
My WorkFlowy tab is currently using 345 MB, while retaining the ability to search the entire outline and navigate quickly. WorkFlowy did recently release a rewrite that made it so snappy, but even before that, it was still faster and used less memory than Dynalist.
Even though I prefer WorkFlowyās āeverything is one outlineā approach (because itās less mental overhead for me), I did attempt to convert to the Dynalist way of multiple documents to try to mitigate the performance issues. Unfortunately, this caused the items I moved to lose their date metadata, which was the last straw that sent me back to WorkFlowy for now.
I do hope you guys are able to solve this issue, because WorkFlowy could use some competition in terms of features.