[ka-Map-users] KaMap performance tuning
Jeff Dege
jdege at korterra.com
Tue May 22 10:25:55 EDT 2007
I understand that there is overhead involved, but I see a 10x difference
in performance between running my wget batchfiles with a full cache and
an empty one.
So the overhead isn't in the networking or communications.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Spencer [mailto:pspencer at dmsolutions.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:56 AM
> To: Jeff Dege
> Cc: ka-map-users at lists.maptools.org
> Subject: Re: [ka-Map-users] KaMap performance tuning
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> this is an interesting analysis. For the record, I always thought
> properly tuned shapefiles (tiled, indexed, sorted) were faster than
> any other format.
>
> I suspect that the actual map rendering time relative to the other
> processes involved (as you said, Apache, PHP and also the PHP code
> that slices the resulting image, plus using wget invokes a network
> stack and various other communications pieces) is fairly
> insignificant in your case (and perhaps in general). I don't really
> know of a good way to isolate the various factors. Well, you could
> look into using xdebug with PHP and invoking tile.php
> directly to see
> what the overhead is.
>
> If this is the case, it would be awesome to have a custom libmap
> executable that could take the place of tile.php - essentially a C
> program (preferably that could run either on command line or as cgi)
> that would create tiles built on top of the mapserver C API (such as
> it is). Given the simplicity of the task, any scripted approach
> (such as tile.php) is going to be less than optimal.
>
> Any volunteers?
>
> Paul
>
>
> On 21-May-07, at 3:25 PM, Jeff Dege wrote:
>
> > We've been using KaMap with Mapserver and OpenLayers, with some
> > success.
> > We've recently begin looking at using PostGIS instead of shapefiles,
> > hoping to getter performance when generating maps that haven't yet
> > been
> > tiled.
> >
> > So we loaded our shapefiles into PostGIS tables, and
> created a new map
> > file that was a copy of the first, except that it got its map data
> > from
> > the PostGIS tables.
> >
> > Our first comparison was using shp2img, which showed a dramatic
> > decrease
> > in the time needed to generate maps - with our data,
> PostGIS was eight
> > to ten times faster.
> >
> > So we cleared out our tile cache, pointed KaMap at the PostGIS map
> > file,
> > and saw very little difference.
> >
> > So we created a batch file that would download a thousand different
> > tiles, using wget to make direct calls against tile.php,
> and timed how
> > long it took to run, with the shapefile and the PostGIS map
> files.
> > The
> > PostGIS test was only five percent that the shapefile test.
> >
> > So we created yet another batch file that used wget to make direct
> > calls
> > against mapserver.exe, running in CGI mode. When
> generating maps from
> > PostGIS data, mapserver was eight times faster than against
> > shapefiles.
> >
> > So now the question: If the image creation is so much faster, when
> > accessed through shp2img, and when accessed through
> mapserver.exe, why
> > is that speed improvement not visible when loading tiles through
> > kamap's
> > tile.php?
> >
> > It's clear to me that there must be some bottleneck, reducing
> > performance. My guess would be in Apache or PHP configuration.
> >
> > Does anyone know how I can measure what time is being spent doing
> > what,
> > in this area? What configuration options I should look at,
> to try to
> > improve performance?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ka-Map-users mailing list
> > ka-Map-users at lists.maptools.org
> > http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/ka-map-users
>
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> |Paul Spencer pspencer at dmsolutions.ca |
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> |Chief Technology Officer |
> |DM Solutions Group Inc http://www.dmsolutions.ca/ |
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the ka-Map-users
mailing list