I know that in past versions of CQ DAM /AEM Assets, there was a limit on how many files (images/PDFs) could be stored in an individual folder before system performance was impacted (I believe it was recommended no more than 500 files per folder). In version 6.3, has this limit been increased? if so, what is the realistic limit of how many files per folder in v6.3?
Solved! Go to Solution.
Views
Replies
Total Likes
This should serve as guideline Assets Sizing Guide to start with. Although usually ordered folder does have the performance overhead and should be < 1000 assets as a general high level best practice. For larger numbers suggest unordered folders only. OAK recommends to use *un-orderable* node type to scale large number of child nodes [1]. In AEM Asset its translate to use sling:Folder node type instead of sling:orderedFolder.
[1] https://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/dos_and_donts.html -> Large number of direct child node
Views
Replies
Total Likes
We will check with the team.
Views
Replies
Total Likes
I believe it should be direct relative to the number of files and the Storage Size of files and your hardware/network to some extent.
1. If you have smaller files in size you can have them more, however if you want to search then it would create problem and traverse lot
2. If you have bigger files in size you should keep lesser number ideally as Network and IO cost would be more on any operations run that will lead to performance issues.
Views
Replies
Total Likes
This should serve as guideline Assets Sizing Guide to start with. Although usually ordered folder does have the performance overhead and should be < 1000 assets as a general high level best practice. For larger numbers suggest unordered folders only. OAK recommends to use *un-orderable* node type to scale large number of child nodes [1]. In AEM Asset its translate to use sling:Folder node type instead of sling:orderedFolder.
[1] https://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/dos_and_donts.html -> Large number of direct child node
Views
Replies
Total Likes
Views
Likes
Replies
Views
Likes
Replies
Views
Likes
Replies