# ComputeLoadProgress() Inaccuracies **URL:** \ **Category:** Cesium for Unity\ **Created:** [April 11, 2025, 1:28pm UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943 "2025-04-11T13:28:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![alec\_zhang1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/alec_zhang1/32/14000_2.png) [@alec\_zhang1](https://community.cesium.com/u/alec_zhang1)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2025, 1:28pm UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/1 "2025-04-11T13:28:33Z")
Hi all, I’ve been working on some progress bar functionality for loading/updating some WMS tilesets, and noticed that the ComputeLoadProgress() function often returns 100 before the tiles have fully loaded. Please find some screenshots attached below: When it returns 100 ![Screenshot 2025-04-10 164007](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/original/3X/1/6/16498922bf5c476b3f1bc81adebbec8214e7901d.jpeg) When it is actually fully loaded (several seconds later) ![Screenshot 2025-04-10 164020](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/original/3X/3/0/306293bf31039ad56b74be4f2a3eb6d59cad4544.jpeg) Am I misunderstanding this behavior? Is there potentially a workaround for this issue? Any and all advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![Kevin\_Ring](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/kevin_ring/32/2003_2.png) [@Kevin\_Ring](https://community.cesium.com/u/Kevin_Ring)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2025, 10:45am UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/2 "2025-04-14T10:45:29Z")
Hi @alec_zhang1, That sounds like a bug. Can you help us reproduce it? Does it always happen, or only with particular tilesets or when interacting in particular ways? ---
**Author:** ![WooorldPaul](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/wooorldpaul/32/21574_2.png) [@WooorldPaul](https://community.cesium.com/u/WooorldPaul)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2025, 2:45pm UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/3 "2025-04-14T14:45:43Z")
In my experience with Google tiles, I’ve had to add a delay of ~400ms before accepting the return value of `ComputeLoadProgress()` as valid. I had assumed that it takes a moment for Cesium to load enough metadata to know what it doesn’t have. ---
**Author:** ![alec\_zhang1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/alec_zhang1/32/14000_2.png) [@alec\_zhang1](https://community.cesium.com/u/alec_zhang1)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2025, 5:42pm UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/4 "2025-04-14T17:42:40Z")
Did some more testing today and this issue seems to be tied to the WMS Raster Overlay – I’ve been using ComputeLoadProgress() with other global tilesets and it seems to work fine there. A little more about my set-up: I’m currently pulling this WMS data from a proxy server which passes along the requests (doing this for auth purposes). The LoadProgress value consistently reaches 100 a couple of seconds ahead of the tileset (seems to depend on network speed or some other latency) when pulling from this server. I am also updating the WMS overlay URL and layers occasionally, so not sure if that might also be related to this issue. ---
**Author:** ![Kevin\_Ring](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/kevin_ring/32/2003_2.png) [@Kevin\_Ring](https://community.cesium.com/u/Kevin_Ring)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2025, 1:21am UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/5 "2025-05-02T01:21:36Z")
Hi folks, do you mind giving yesterday’s v1.16.0 release a try to see if you still have this problem? We reworked the progress computation a bit in this release, which may (🤞) have fixed it for you. ---
**Author:** ![alec\_zhang1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/alec_zhang1/32/14000_2.png) [@alec\_zhang1](https://community.cesium.com/u/alec_zhang1)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2025, 5:49pm UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/6 "2025-05-02T17:49:36Z")
Hey Kevin, Thanks for the heads up! Just updated to v1.16.0 and gave it a try, but unfortunately I’m still seeing similar things with the WMS layers 😕 not sure if there’s something else going on in the back… ---
**Author:** ![Kevin\_Ring](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/kevin_ring/32/2003_2.png) [@Kevin\_Ring](https://community.cesium.com/u/Kevin_Ring)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2025, 11:04am UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/7 "2025-05-05T11:04:16Z")
I just tried to reproduce this with Cesium World Terrain plus a WMS server, but I wasn’t able to. `ComputeLoadProgress` only returned 100.0f after both the tileset and the WMS were fully loaded. Here’s the WMS component I used for testing: ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/original/3X/c/2/c2d6189796f130a019f8a7dcdcc7c2ff973a2b66.png) (this WMS has data for Australia) And here’s the script I used to print the progress: ```auto using UnityEngine; using CesiumForUnity; [ExecuteInEditMode] public class Foo : MonoBehaviour { // Start is called before the first frame update void Start() { } float previous = -1.0f; // Update is called once per frame void Update() { Cesium3DTileset tileset = this.GetComponent(); if (tileset != null) { float progress = tileset.ComputeLoadProgress(); if (progress != previous) { Debug.Log(progress); previous = progress; } } } } ``` Any idea what might be different in your setup? ---
**Author:** ![alec\_zhang1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/alec_zhang1/32/14000_2.png) [@alec\_zhang1](https://community.cesium.com/u/alec_zhang1)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2025, 9:14pm UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/8 "2025-05-05T21:14:41Z")
Did some more testing with a super dumbed-down scene (with just a single tileset and a camera) and I think I may have stumbled on the underlying cause! Looks like setting a higher Maximum Simultaneous Tile Loads value causes this behavior to occur – when setting it to 20, the progress value had no issues. However, when using higher values (100+), this issue begins to surface. Not sure if this is intended or if there is a workaround outside of lowering this value, but hopefully this sheds some more light on the situation! ---
**Author:** ![Kevin\_Ring](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/kevin_ring/32/2003_2.png) [@Kevin\_Ring](https://community.cesium.com/u/Kevin_Ring)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2025, 5:58am UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/9 "2025-05-06T05:58:30Z")
Well, I really wouldn’t advise setting the Maximum Simultaneous Tile Loads to such a large value. But, I tried it and I’m still not able to see a problem with the progress percentage. I tried setting it to 100 on both the Cesium 3D Tileset and on the Cesium Web Map Service Raster Overlay components. Please share as much information as you possible can, up to and including your actual scene file if possible! The difference could come down to the specific tileset you’re using, or some other setting that isn’t obvious. ---
**Author:** ![alec\_zhang1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/cesium/user_avatar/community.cesium.com/alec_zhang1/32/14000_2.png) [@alec\_zhang1](https://community.cesium.com/u/alec_zhang1)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2025, 9:47pm UTC](https://community.cesium.com/t/computeloadprogress-inaccuracies/39943/10 "2025-05-08T21:47:54Z")
Strangely enough, when I tried again today it seemed to be working properly. Maybe there was a Unity bug and the package didn’t update properly? Thanks again for all of the help – I’ll make sure to let you know if something like this pops up again.