[ka-Map-users] couple issues - maybe a cache bug

[Stephen Woodbridge]

percy wrote:
> Ravi, I noticed in your previous post that you are hosting on localhost, 
> so I bet you're running windows. I think the size difference you noticed 
> is because even though the tile's size is only 200 bytes, windows FAT or 
> NTFS or whatever is set to store everything in 4096 byte minimum blocks.
> Percy

This is also the case on Linux. If you generate a a large cache where 
there are a lot of these small tiles it can end up consuming 80-90% of 
you disk space. I have a large tile cache where that is the case on linux.

-Steve

> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 23:40:02 -0800
> From: Ravi <ravikapoor101 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [ka-Map-users] couple issues - maybe a cache bug
> To: ka-Map-users at lists.maptools.org
> Message-ID: <4563FED2.7050606 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 
> 
> Problem 1
> ----------
> First I noticed that most of my tile cache images were 200-1000 bytes
> but they were taking 4096 bytes on the disk. Hence to reduce disk size I
> increased tile size from 256x256 to 1024x1024. I thought this would also
> reduce number of http requests and speed up the application.
> 
> After this change, the tile cache images generated were between 2k-10k.
> However due to this change, ka-maps seems to come to a grinding halt.
> Even for extent/zoom tiles that were present in the cache, it took very
> very long time for ka-maps to finish loading the maps. Any idea why?