Slow time deleting filtered rows. Optimization help (sumproduct).

Many functions many problems.

My opinion on this subject:
1. Prepare yourself a macro that will restore formulas
2. Work on a sheet without formulas
3. If they are needed, then restore them

But if you change the ranges of the table you will have to correct the macros anyway, because most of your functions are different from each other and this does not allow for more automation, especially if you change the ranges in an unusual way.

Can you do this, prepare a macro for restoring formulas (for this table layout that you provided) ?

I suppose that I could just leave formula with 1 employee, delete rest, add/del rows I need and just fix ranges in that one formula then drag it down to every other employee. Anyway, thank you for an idea.

With such a large number of complex formulas, the spreadsheet will always be slow.
I see such a scheme of action:
1. I write all employees (current employees at a given moment)
2. I run a macro that introduces formulas for calculating "employee parameters"
3. I run a macro that copies formulas into values
4. Until something changes, I work on a sheet without formulas - the spreadsheet works faster without calculating formulas
5. If I need to add another module (34 lines), I add it and repeat steps from 1 to 3

But does a single module, from blue line ('Addon') to the last white line, before next blue line, ('[3]JobName10')) always have 34 rows as in your 'xlsx' file ?
If not, then "kashanka" ... ... whatever it means, I hope nothing bad ... In that case, you'll have to make a database (access, sql, etc.), not excel file.

Originally Posted by porucha vevrku

m
But does a single module, from blue line ('Addon') to the last white line, before next blue line, ('[3]JobName10')) always have 34 rows as in your 'xlsx' file ?
If not, then "kashanka" ... ... whatever it means, I hope nothing bad ... In that case, you'll have to make a database (access, sql, etc.), not excel file.

It does have always the same amount of rows yes (34 in this case). As I though it wouldn't be as practical as I wish to make it work in excel. Anyway I think I can live with deleting and fixing formula from time to time.
Thank you for help.
Edit: also sorry for breaking the rules, edited my first post.

Originally Posted by porucha vevrku

If not, then "kashanka" ... ... whatever it means, I hope nothing bad ...

in short: brothel in data (in this case)

Thanks, sandy666 ... ... but it was just a light joke ... ... normally/usually it does not have "such an overtone" in Slavic languages:
Pravdepodobne iba obycajny neporiadok ... jaternica alebo krvavnicka nie je zla
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaszanka
Btw, have you ever eaten black pudding, with onion and warm ?
I recommend ...
Regards

@porucha vevrku
I like "kashanka" fried with onion and Heineken for this