Skip to content
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

constant high CPU from raster sources #3620

Closed
kriscarle opened this issue Nov 15, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

constant high CPU from raster sources #3620

kriscarle opened this issue Nov 15, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

@kriscarle
Copy link

Raster sources appear to stuck in a render loop and keep the tab at a constant high CPU usage.. The profiler seems to confirm that it is a render method. This occurs with examples like https://www.mapbox.com/mapbox-gl-js/example/map-tiles/ though for me they stay around 30% CPU. On a more complex map I've seen a sustained 150% CPU and my Macbook was maxed out.

mapbox-gl-js version: 0.27 (doesn't happen with 0.20.1)

Steps to Trigger Behavior

  1. Go to: https://www.mapbox.com/mapbox-gl-js/example/map-tiles/
  2. Open chrome task manger / profiler
  3. Compare with other non-raster examples

Expected Behavior

In the last version I was using (0.20.1) CPU drops to near zero after the map renders the first time. You can see an example of that here https://mapforenvironment.org/layer/map/85/Tree-Cover-Loss-2000-2014#10.86/2.3114/22.8861

Actual Behavior

Maps with raster sources are stuck in a render loop and CPU stays high
task_manager_-_google_chrome_and_add_a_raster_tile_source___mapbox

developer_tools_-_https___www_mapbox_com_mapbox-gl-js_example_map-tiles_

@kriscarle
Copy link
Author

appears to be related to #3398

@mourner
Copy link
Member

mourner commented Nov 15, 2016

@kriscarle yes, it's the same issue. Tracking a fix at #3399

@mourner mourner closed this as completed Nov 15, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants