Hi Adams,
The intention of the code is that the images shouldn't be loaded in to
memory until they need to be viewed. As far as I can tell, the delay
you are seeing is the JAI code running through the file finding the
geospatial tags, trying to find out where the images go. I have some
tiles (similar sizes) that are handled really quickly, and others that
are pretty slow. I haven't been able to find out what the difference
between the two files are, or what JAI is doing differently for those
slower files.
I haven't noticed an issue with the scale settings, I'll take a look
at it, though.
- Don
On Sep 27, 2009, at 6:52 AM, Adams Tan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have been playing around with ImageTileLayer and I noticed once I
> set the layer to be visible, it will take quite a while (assuming I
> have a huge 30MB png sliced into 300 tiles, about 100KB per slice)
> where I will see small boxes appearing one by one. At this stage,
> does the images already get loaded into the memory heap? If not, why
> would this process take so long? I assume that the images are only
> loaded (on demand) when the current scale matches the cut-off scale
> specified, hence, this long delay seems unnecessary.
> cale goes lower than what I specified in the cut-off scale,
>
> Another issue that I noticed is the cut off scale does not seems to
> make much diff on when the image is actually displayed (pre-loaded
> or not, i'm not sure). A setting of 100,000 (default) and 1,000,000
> does not seems to affect when each images are displayed. Often I see
> partial display of tiles even though i set the cache size to 50.
> Sometimes I count the number of squares and they are lower than the
> cache size that I set. Shouldn't all the tiles in the current map
> view be displayed as long as they are below my specified cache size?
>
> Thanks,
> Adams
--
[To unsubscribe to this list send an email to "majdart_at_bbn.com"
with the following text in the BODY of the message "unsubscribe openmap-users"]
Received on Sun Sep 27 2009 - 10:49:41 EDT