Re: [OpenLayers-Dev] [SPAM] Re: OpenLayers performance

[Tomas Novotny]

OK, numbers ar fine. Well, when I try to use them in arguing with our secretary girl I'm loser. She can feel the difference between OL and GM significantly on her 5 years old machine with IE6 (map in OL doesn't move but jumps). And she is not alone. It wasn't me who came with problem using panning but users. Maybe they are too demanding but how can I give reasons for this? So I looked in the code and found some possible problems as I wrote sooner. Of course on my quite new PC I don't have such big problems. Still map in OL slightly jumps now and then during move. When I try it in Safari it's much better but I need it fast in FF and IE. After all, I'm happy to hear about improvements between 2.5 and 2.6 versions. 35% is great result and I'm looking forward 2.7. Continue in good work but don't forget people will be comparing OL to GM, YahooMaps and other mapping portals (ie. mapy.atlas.cz in our country) no matter the functionality OL offers. Tomas Christopher Schmidt wrote: On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 09:35:50PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The link to OL example Guillaume posted is also the case I wrote about. Let's try it (http://www.openlayers.org/dev/examples/fullScreen.html). Please switch off overlay for fair-play and zoom in the map. Then make a few large circles with map using mouse. Try the same with GM. And don't try to tell me you have the same feeling (at least in FF 2 and IE7). Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but on my browser on my computer, they feel about the same. This is backed up, to some extent, by empirical evidence: using a stopwatch, I dragged each map around in circles, clockwise, for 5 seconds, with the Firebug profiler turned on for each. OpenLayers: 944.26ms, 57342 calls Google Maps: 820.147ms, 44818 calls So, it appears that OpenLayers could be said, based on the empirical evidence on my browser, to be about 15% slower than Google Maps: given the limited scope of the specific test here, I would say that's not really a big enough difference to complain about. Interestingly enough, this is apparently a significant change from 2.5: OpenLayers 2.5: 1469.714ms, 138497 calls So, we've gained a 35% performance improvement without even trying. Not bad. And I've made lot of such tests with same result. I have absolutely nothing personal against OL, I really like them from many points of view. I also understand and agree with Christopher when he talks about freedom of influencing OL code. But if I try to solve that panning problem I would do so significant change that I would be really worried about the rest of the code. Well, without understanding what is behaving slowly for you, it's hard for anyone to fix it, but as I said, there is no intention to be slow, and I don't see any serious evidence to indicate that OL is any worse in this case than any other mapping API on my platform of choice. Regards,

_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
Dev@openlayers.org
http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev