[MS4W-Users] MS4W 3.0 beta 7, fcgi and raster layer

[Jeff McKenna]

Hello Jukka,

Comments inline below:

Rahkonen Jukka wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I had a try with fcgi which is advertised to give great speed
> improvements.
> I had a fresh MS4W 3.0 beta 7 installation, topped up with MS 5.6.0
> update.
> I followed the instructions and edited httpd.cong accordingly. This
> seemed to
> go right, because now my server is answering also for requests which I
> send 
> to \fcgi-bin.  

excellent!  I believe there might be a problem with the fastcgi module 
on WindowsXP; if you have any comments on this please see the associated 
ticket http://bugzilla.maptools.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2133

However, I do not see much difference in behaviour.
> JMeter test
> with 10 and 20 concurrent users give similar output with both cgi and
> fcgi requests, 
> about 5 images per second. Throughput is about 600 KB/sec. After reading
> 
> http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout
> I was awaiting about two times more speed for fcgi.
> 
> Is there something more I should do, in addition to making fcgi module
> to load 
> and commenting out the few lines from httpd.conf file?

If you followed the normal instructions then you shouldn't have to do 
anything else.  For the record Daniel Morissette gave a good explanation 
on the MapServer-users list 
http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-users/2009-December/063981.html

That said, I would like to hopefully see the FOSS4G benchmarking 
exercise performed on the Windows platform someday - maybe I'll have 
more time this exercise to run it on my own Windows server for 
comparison at least.

> 
> I had only one raster layer in my test, and I added the line
>  PROCESSING "CLOSE_CONNECTION=DEFER"
> to layer definitions. I am not sure if it is needed for raster layers
> which are read through tileindex. My tileindex shapefile has about 13000
> 
> polygons so I guess it should gain from using fcgi. Images themselves
> are
> processed in typical Mapserver way, they are uncompressed, tiled, and
> with
> overviews.
> 

Maybe change to a database layer, with Daniel's suggestions, and retry.

Thanks for your excellent feedback.

-jeff

-- 
Jeff McKenna
FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/