PagedDataBoundComponent<T>.Count should be long

[DashNY]

Describe the bug
PagedDataBoundComponent<T>.Count parameter (and maybe in other components) should be of type long, not int.
Rationale: most databases support over 2^32 rows and statements like SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table return a 64-bit value. This is true for MS SQL, Postgres, and even document based databases (e.g. RavenDB)

Other parameters, e.g. PageSize should stay as int.

Thank you.

[akorchev]

Hi @DashNY,

Can you elaborate on why you need the Count property to be long? We don't want to encourage people to try and display more than 2147483647 items (which is what int.MaxValue is). And that seems to be the only thing we would get from a long Count.

[DashNY]

You would still set the page size to e.g. 100, because you don't want to show too many records on the UI at a time. Also you wouldn't expect a user to navigate to the page 2147483647+ manually one by one. Therefore it probably makes sense to keep the PageIndex and PageSize as int.

However you may want to show to the users the total number of records that exist in the DB, which is of type long according to all the DB engines I've encountered.

For instance if you run this on PostgreSQL, the return is bigint which is 64-bit integer:

SELECT pg_typeof(count(*)) FROM users;

Right now my code is filled with this kind of statements where I cast TotalCount from long to int. I'd prefer to remove the noise.
<RadzenDataGrid Count="((int)_users.TotalCount)"

My guess, when other users set this property, they do the casting elsewhere in code after the SELECT count(*) statement but before it gets to the .razor markup. This works well up to the point when you go beyond 2147483647 rows in DB. Then you get a negative value due to overflow.

One possible option here is to introduce long LongCount property alongside int Count similar to that of Enumerable extension method. This way the change wouldn't affect existing users.

[akorchev]

My guess, when other users set this property, they do the casting elsewhere in code after the SELECT count(*) statement but before it gets to the .razor markup.

A lot of users use the Count() Linq extension method which also returns int.

This works well up to the point when you go beyond 2147483647 rows in DB. Then you get a negative value due to overflow.

Do you have an existing case where you have a table with more than Int.MaxValue number of rows and you need to set that to the Count property?