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

GeoJSON-triggered Chrome crash test case #790

Closed
tmcw opened this issue Oct 22, 2014 · 8 comments
Closed

GeoJSON-triggered Chrome crash test case #790

tmcw opened this issue Oct 22, 2014 · 8 comments
Labels

Comments

@tmcw
Copy link
Contributor

tmcw commented Oct 22, 2014

Triggers a sad-face tab crash in Chrome Version 38.0.2125.104

@tmcw tmcw added the bug 🐞 label Oct 22, 2014
@jfirebaugh
Copy link
Contributor

@jfirebaugh
Copy link
Contributor

Upstream says it's an OOM crash.

@tmcw
Copy link
Contributor Author

tmcw commented Oct 23, 2014

Interesting. I wonder if there's something we can do to make this consume less memory? 1024 polygons are included, and are within the realm of Leaflet etc.

@mourner
Copy link
Member

mourner commented Oct 28, 2014

@tmcw this happens probably because you're fetching this GeoJSON into the main thread, and then passing it to the worker. Loading big GeoJSON data in the worker directly (by passing the URL in the GeoJSONSourcce options instead) should work fine.

@tmcw
Copy link
Contributor Author

tmcw commented Oct 28, 2014

I'll try that. Can you say more about what the difference is here? The size of the geojson isn't super huge - 600kb. Is the memory thing in the JSON transfer, or something else?

@mourner
Copy link
Member

mourner commented Oct 29, 2014

Yeah, JSON load + transfer. Of course I'm not sure it's the culprit, but this is the first thing to try.

@jfirebaugh
Copy link
Contributor

It's not the JSON transfer, it's tiling the GeoJSON. GeoJSON is tiled at zooms 1, 5, 9, and 13. This GeoJSON generates 29700 tiles at z9 and 536580 tiles at z13, and the worker either takes forever to process that (master), or crashes (0.4.1). So basically this reduces to #464.

@mourner
Copy link
Member

mourner commented Dec 1, 2014

Going to take a crack at fixing this, see #464 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants