Thanks for the help. I wonder why my Numbers worksheet is running so slowly.I had to copy the information into Excel because it was not making me wait. I tried closing all my worksheets, except the one I was using in Numbers.I even copied and pasted the worksheet into a new Numbers file just in case the other worksheets in the file were causing the delay. But the program is running very sluggish, and the rainbow wheel keeps me waiting when I try to select a column. Do you have any suggestions? Marycoleman721 wrote: Thanks for the help. I wonder why my Numbers worksheet is running so slowly.
Hi Mary, For clarity in communication it's always advisable to use the vocabulary specific to the application. It took me a couple of times through this post before I decided you were referring to Tables, not Sheets when you said Worksheets. How big are the tables in your document?
Delete Table Rows. Deleting an entire row works even if your data is in a table, but if you have data both inside and outside the table, you might need to delete the row from the inside exclusively. To remove blank rows in the table, hold 'Ctrl' and click one cell in each row you want to remove.
How many header rows and header columns does the table have? How many are there? What formulas are you using? All of these can be factors in the speed with which Numbers runs. Numbers often balks at large tables, and the fact that it recalculates immediately when something changes can bring about perceptible delays. A search of the forum for 'slow' or 'slowness' willl bring up some threads on this topic. Regards, Barry. Free handwritten fonts for mac.
Find / replace doesn't apply to rows but to cell's contents so it can't find the blank rows. The sort tip described by Barry is efficient but it has a drawback: the order of filled rows will be modified. Here is a slightly enhanced one. It use a supplementary column located at the right edge of the table.
Its first standard cell contains the formula: =IF(COUNTA(OFFSET($A$1,ROW()-1,0,1,COLUMN()-1))>0,ROW(),') Fill down With that, we may sort upon this column. The blank rows will be gathered at bottom but the ordering of other ones will not be changed. Yvan KOENIG (VALLAURIS, France) 1 septembre 2010 09:10:42.
Jerrold Green1 wrote: Yvan, This somewhat simpler expression seems to do the same thing. =IF(LEN(A)>0, ROW(), ') Am I missing anything? I choose to check that every cells of a row (before the one in which is the test formula) are empty. You test only cell of column A. I think that my formula is more complete but of course it depends of which kind of datas are stored in the table. I have a lot ot table with nothing in cells of column A but values in other columns. I wish to add a boring info.
My Powermac G5 bought at end of 2005 died: motherboard dead. My datas from the forum are on its internal HDs (they don't match the definition “important datas”) so I will unable to reach them until next week when I will receive enclosures in which I will put the devices. So, a lot of my custom tools will not be available making me less efficient.
It's really pitiful: I never got an Apple product with so short life. Happily its older 'brother', a Powermac G4 is always alive so I will be able to run some oldies under Classic. Yvan KOENIG (VALLAURIS, France, 2010/09/02 21:11:36). KOENIG Yvan wrote: I choose to check that every cells of a row (before the one in which is the test formula) are empty. You test only cell of column A. I think that my formula is more complete but of course it depends of which kind of datas are stored in the table.
I have a lot ot table with nothing in cells of column A but values in other columns. So this expression in Row 2 of the Aux. Column and fill down should work: =IF(COUNTA(2:2)>1, ROW(), ') No? I would like to pay my respects to the fallen Mac.
May his older brother continue to live on and prosper. Jerrold Green1 wrote: =IF(COUNTA(2:2)>1, ROW(), ') No?
One more time, yes and no. Yes if you take 'empty' cell at its true meaning. No, if you take that with the often used meaning: blank or contain a string whose length is zero. For such a test, I felt that the second acception (which I don't like) may be valid.
How to start page numbers on page 3 in word for mac 2011. So I built my formula upon it. It checks that the result of the concatenation of every cells on the left of the formula is a value whose length is zero. I repeat that it's a matter of choice. Only the user know exactly which is the one matching its needs. I know that mine is not perfect, my preferred one would be with the formula in column A so that adding new column wouldn't change its behaviour but I quickly thought that it wouldn't be clean in the tables. As aspect is an important feature of Numbers, I choose to put the formula in the 'Far East'. Most of the time, I don't explain why I choose this or that soluce.