-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Zoom in/out performance issues with a huge number of marker/polyline #5041
Comments
Hi @PatrickZenker – thanks for reporting this issue. Would you be able to provide a minimal, self-contained jsfiddle/jsbin that illustrates the regression? |
Hey, sorry for my late response. I've made a jsfiddle but the position of the markers are incorrect: https://jsfiddle.net/kozLk0fn/ Therefore you can view and copy the resources from here: The line layers are in this very simple example (no logic from us) comment out because of performance issues. |
Thanks @P-Zenker, we'll check it out. |
I don't see any lines in either example. Are they correct? Is there a reason you're creating a separate source and line layer for each individual feature? That's unlikely to perform well under any circumstances. Try creating a single source and layer instead. |
The lines are not important to show the error because the marker themselves have a performance issue if you compare the two versions. |
Hey,
i've updated from mapbox-gl-js version v0.38.0 to v0.39.1
I have a setup with around 450 nodes (marker) and 1100 edges (polyline):
Expected Behavior
If I zoom in and out I expect a smooth and fast rendering & animation like in v0.38.0
Actual Behavior
There are huge performance issues. It takes around 1 second to compute the very jerky result. Tested with Apple Safari (Version 10.1.1 (12603.2.4)) and Google Chrome (59.0.3071.115 64-Bit).
To clarify my issue, I've made two Quicktime screen videos (mov format):
v0.38.0 vs v0.39.1.zip
With only 30 nodes and edges there are no visible performance issues.
Best regards,
Patrick
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: