What kind of relationship has been defined for this portal? Any chance it accesses a very large set of related records? Any summary fields or unstored calculation fields in this portal?
The database is for contacts and the portal being accessed shows a history of emails or phone calls to that particular contact. For any one person the number or records accessed is probably about 5. The total number of records though is 13,184.
The portal (Contact History) is related to People through a unique ID and Personnel through a different ID. Both relationships allow creation of records for the fields in the portal. This is the same structure though as other portals in the database. The only difference I can see is the connection to the Personnel table.
No summary fields and no calculation fields.
Thank you for your post, and I apologize for the late reply.
Since this is only happening with one portal on a specific layout, I'd like to try a few tests.
First, to see if the relationship is damaged, create a new layout based on the Contacts table. On this new layout, just include the ID field from Contacts and a portal into Personnel with two fields. Go to Browse to make sure this is working, then access it via Instant Web Publishing and see if the response is acceptable (that is, much less than 15 minutes).
If this doesn't work, then I would try deleting the relationship into Personnel and recreating it.
If this works, then try to copy over some of the other fields from the non-working layout into the new layout. Do not move over the tab or any other objects. If this works, then your fields are find, and I would then move over some objects.
In essence, I'm trying to determine if it is the relationship, the layout, an object on the layout, etc.
I know some time has passed, so if you found a solution, please post it here so others can benefit.
Thanks for the advice. I decided after some considerable thought that I do not need a portal for this particular function and converted all the entries into one field on the main table. It now works faster. So, not really a solution to the problem but it works so I am not complaining.
I have the same response via safari Db not that big. In fact I had better response albeit slow also, from ie 8 on an old xp, of course the access froanother Mac pro and safari is much better, it still has slot to be desired. Not all scripts work on web publishing, that is frustrating. Good luck, come on apple