[Mapserver-users] Tileindex questions.
Ed McNierney
ed@topozone.com
Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:47:45 -0500
Bob -
As the ratio of needed files to total files grows, the TILEINDEX becomes
less useful, but it is so very inexpensive - and the rendering of every
tile in the dataset so expensive - that I can't imagine it being a
liability.
As you produce lower-resolution levels of image pyramid, it DOES make
sense to merge the files into larger-sized tiles, and this will reduce
the benefit of the TILEINDEX since as the total shrinks the needed/total
ratio will grow. Having lots of tiny files is *much* less efficient
than having a few larger files.
- Ed
Ed McNierney
President and Chief Mapmaker
TopoZone.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Basques [mailto:bob.basques@ci.stpaul.mn.us]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 5:28 PM
To: Ed McNierney
Subject: Re: [Mapserver-users] Tileindex questions.
Ed McNierney wrote:
>Bob -
>
>No, creating seamless edgematched tiles does not take care of that
>aspect. It doesn't address the issue of how MapServer determines
>*which* of the 528 files needs to be used to produce a requested map.
>
>
I get that aspect of it, I was really wondering at what point the
tileindex becomes less effective at it's purpose, of increase response
performance.
bobb
>If you're requesting an image that requires most of the source images,
>a TILEINDEX won't help much. But you'll have other problems - if you
>think that's going to happen (in your case you say it won't) you should
>have resampled lower-resolution images available to serve those
>lower-resolution requests. Otherwise you're going to be reading a
>zillion pixels from disk only to throw away most of them.
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Mapserver-users mailing list
Mapserver-users@lists.gis.umn.edu
http://lists.gis.umn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users