If KML is an option for you, then I would definitely be using it. The InfoWindow behavior you described is supported by KML layers and the latency doesn't increase with the addition of more data.
Note: Multiple people have had problems with dynamically generating large KML files with PHP. The PHP processing takes longer than the Google servers will wait. So far, I've only seen this problem with PHP. Chad Killingsworth On Dec 7, 3:56 pm, Ryan Wood <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you recommend that I instead use KML? > > Here is a tutorial I can > use?http://code.google.com/apis/kml/articles/phpmysqlkml.html > > On Dec 7, 4:42 pm, Ben Appleton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Fusion Tables (and KML) are rendered as image tiles by a Google server, > > precisely to be as fast as you observe. v3 markers are rendered in the > > browser, so the speed depends on the browser. > > > You can speed up marker rendering by setting 'clickable' false (removes DOM > > click targets) and 'flat' true (hides shadows). I seem to recall these > > double marker rendering speed. > > > You can also use a marker manager to cluster markers so that fewer are shown > > at once. They can all be seen when you zoom in. > > > You could also try a fast browser such as Safari or Chrome, which are both > > based on the (fast) WebKit rendering engine. > > > - Ben > > On 8 Dec 2010 08:31, "Ryan Wood" <[email protected]> wrote: -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps JavaScript API v3" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-js-api-v3?hl=en.
