AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Greg udig lv3/27/2023 ![]() The Road to Speed All will be in Geoserver 1.6 Data sources with high connection overhead will benefit much more from FastCGI. ![]() (These will be reported as “bugs” as time permits.) Both servers can be FAST, but require some special configuration. Identified a few places where Mapserver can improve too. Outcome of the tests Lots of performance optimizations to Geoserver which will be available in version 1.6. Conclusion: Use Java 6! Tomcat 6 doesn't support Java 1.4 Servlet Container and Java (Geoserver only) These results show average response times for the same WMS request when Geoserver is backed by different Servlet containers and Java versions. īreakdown of Geoserver Response Time 404: Document not found The Write image step is dependant on output format. ![]() FastCGI through Apache and mod_fcgi.īreakdown of Mapserver Response Time FastCGI eliminates Start mapserv process and Connect to DB costs. The same binary file was used for both CGI and FastCGI. Each request fetches one layer with 1000 features from a data set of 10,000. FastCGI (Mapserver only) Notes: Average of 30 samples. Geoserver simplifies geometry before reprojecting. Geotools is slightly faster than PROJ for these cases. PROJ optimizes by assuming these source and target datums are equivalent. Test #3: Reprojection Currently Mapserver calls PROJ for every vertex, but it could improve by batching those into a single call. or Throughput, if you prefer An alternative way to summarize the data collected for the concurrency test. Geoserver uses connection pooling with 20 connections. Mapserver is using FastCGI via Apache/mod_fcgi. Mapserver and Geoserver use the same data. ![]() Test #2: Concurrent Requests Notes: Data in PostGIS and shapefile formats. The main difference is that now we're issuing multiple concurrent requests. We issue multiple requests with pseudo-random BBOXes that fetch approximately 1,000 features. Test #2: Concurrent Requests Using the same tiger roads data set with 10,000 records. The same 30 requests are executed for each scenario. Each bar is an average of 30 sample WMS requests, each using a different bounding box to fetch and draw appx. Shapefiles Notes: This test uses two different data sets: one with 3 million features, the other with 10,000. JMeter issues WMS requests to fetch ~1,000 features, limited by the 'bbox' parameter. Mapserver and Geoserver layers point at the data. Shapefiles Two Data Sets: 3,000,000 Tiger roads in Texas 10,000 Tiger roads in Dallas, Texas Both data sets are in PostGIS and shapefile format. Apache 2.2.4 (with mod_fcgi) Geoserver 1.6 beta 3 Tomcat 6.0.14 WMS requests Vector Data ![]() Test Environment Shapefiles Mapserver 4.10.2 Server Computer Client Computer JMeter 2.2 WMS requests Data Additional Server Specs: Dual core (1.8Ghz per core). Web Map Service (WMS) WMS User request=getmap& layers=states,lakes& bbox=-85,36,-60,49& format=png&. Keeping the tests fair Not an easy job! We tried to understand what each server does under the hood to ensure we're not accidentally performing unnecessary processing on either server. We do not test stability, usability, etc., We do not test styling or labelling. Identify and fix inefficiencies in Geoserver. Identify configuration settings that will improve performance. Compare performance of WMS GetMap requests in Mapserver and Geoserver. Discussion of performance tests and results. PostGIS, Concurrency, and other exciting tests. WMS Performance Tests! Mapserver & Geoserver FOSS4G 2007 Presented by Brock Anderson and Justin Deoliveira Shapefiles vs. Wms Performance Tests Map Server Vs Geo Server ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |