Is there a limit to the size of your site?
Hi,
We have recently encountered an issue that appears to be related to the number of layers within a site. Q. Is there a limit of associated with the size xml & layer files?
Our primary operational map service contains a 'large' number of layers (in the order of 450 layers* but most layers are not visible by default). We also have a somewhat complex configuration @ the mxd level w.r.t grouped layers**.
When we attempt add a new layer to the site, it bombs out with a generic message. Log files are not giving any info of any real value from first glance.
I will be raising a support call once we do some additional testing w.r.t. splitting the primary operational map service into multiple services (for testing purposes). I wanted to get this one out there in case others have experienced the issue or there are know limitations?
Notes:
* - I dislike (an understatement) the fact we have such a large 'single' map service but as Geocortex REST API currently does not support group functionality at the application level (grouping needs to be done at the mxd level), we do not have an option to break down into further map services without changing our TOC structure (TOC structure has been driven by the 'business' view of assets). The issue is further complicated by the fact that if you group your layers @ the mxd level, you thus loose the abilty to control your TOC ordering w.r.t. the inclusion of other map services.
** - we do utilise 'Themes' but the theme concept does not offer the same functionality of 'groups'. I know the trend these days is to do away with TOCs but the reality is in our environment is the TOC is still a core tool in assisting layer structure for the application (the theme approach only provides limited usefulness).
Brad
-
Further investigation @ our end infers this is an issue associated with the themes functionality & map services containing large number of layers (400+).
I will be logging a bug report with support & will keep you posted of this outcome.
Brad
0 -
Quick update - this is a bug with the current release that is being investigated.
0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
2 comments