Your achievements

Level 1

0% to

Level 2

Tip /
Sign in

Sign in to Community

to gain points, level up, and earn exciting badges like the new
Bedrock Mission!

Learn more

View all

Sign in to view all badges

The References Panel does not load properly in AEM 6.3


Level 3

hi ,

While working on my translation project in AEM 6.3 , I use the references panel to update/promote language copies to other languages from EN and to Synchronize/Roll out the language copies to live copies , however for all the system users the References Panel does not load properly and throws an error, however if I login with my  administrator credentials , it seems to work with much speed.

I am not sure if there is any difference in the response time on events for different user levels in AEM , particularly for queries like loading all References of pages in the JCR.

Please help me figure out this issue also suggest some way to improve the performance of the tool .

Also if there is any way using the legacy AEM tools to carry out these tasks which would save some time for my operations team.

Thank you,


0 Replies


Employee Advisor

Can you provide more details on the error?

Also, can you test with a user who is part of OOTB content authors group?


Level 3

hi ,

Attached the screenshot . The error says " cannot load content " . Also we have given the users OOTB content authors group.



Community Advisor


Could you please check the errors for reference request in browser console.

First when you select a page and click on References, check the browsers network tab for references.html request and see what is the status, it should be load and 200.

and if it is loaded with 200, try to open this request in new tab(right click and open to new tab)

Also check browsers console for javascript errors.

Screen Shot 2018-07-05 at 5.30.15 PM.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-05 at 5.34.06 PM.png

If below gives error check permissions.




Level 1

Hi folks, I work with Samiksha on the above-mentioned system.

A little more context (in case it's relevant);

Our sites are hosted by Adobe Managed Services on regular AWS infrastructure.

We are on the basic (lowest) AMS tier.

So I just selected one of our pages through the /sites.html/ interface while logged in with a regular editor account. That initial request timed out with a 504 gateway error. (I suspect that this error is specifically occurring at the Dispatcher/ELB level as we have to directly access the Author server by IP address and port number in order to upload large packages without hitting similar timeouts. I forget whether we determined that that timeout was happening at the ELB or the Dispatcher)


The raw response headers were simply


Content-Length: 0

Connection: keep-alive

The user interface on page displayed "An error occurred while refreshing list of references." in the left hand references pane.

So that first request looks to me like it just got timed out after 1 minute (59149 ms)

Retrying the request for the same page by IP address succeeds, though still takes roughly 60 seconds.

Retrying the request for the same page by IP as the admin AEM account on that server succeeds and takes roughly 30 seconds.

The response document that AEM sends to the request from the Admin account  contains what appear to be debug comments ( e.g.

<!--cq{"decorated":false,"type":"wcm/msm/components/coral/references/livecopy","path":"/content/bmc/gr/en/redirects/it-solutions/remedyforce-features-integrations","selectors":null,"servlet":"Script /libs/wcm/msm/components/coral/references/livecopy/livecopy.jsp","totalTime":5,"selfTime":5}--> ) but is otherwise identical. As in bitwise identical once the lines containing comments are stripped.

The response document (which appears to contain just regular HTML) is 600 lines long and just under 50K in size.

I'm assuming that the admin request is consistently processed faster (~X2) because the server does not need to do as many layers of security checking, but that's just a guess.

Sometimes reference checks take in excess of 3 minutes to complete, generally for content with more history. However, none of the content in our system is more than 9-ish months old, we haven't had revision generation on publish turned on. The times taken seem excessive.