That is indeed the case, there is no other service that can use reduced resolution geometries. In the future the new features API (previously known as wfs3) might have an extension to return reduced resolution geometries based on a target resolution parameter passed in the request (there is chatter about it, but the extension is not formally defined yet).
Cheers Andrea Il ven 26 lug 2019, 16:27 DEGRÈVE Benoît <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > > [RESOLVED] > > > > I found that pre-generalized feature only works with WMS service. > > > > See discussion : > http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/GeoServer-pregeneralized-features-extension-with-OpenLayers-td4981400.html > > > > And indeed, this can be seen in Geoserver logs : Geoserver uses > pre-generalization only when clients send WMS requests. > > > > > > *Ben* > > > > *De :* DEGRÈVE Benoît [mailto:[email protected]] > *Envoyé :* jeudi 25 juillet 2019 10:02 > *À :* [email protected] > *Objet :* [Geoserver-users] Pre-generalized features > > > > Hi all, > > > > I’ve pre-generalized a layer. > > It works as expected but it doesn’t seem much faster. It’s hard to tell > the difference. > > > > Layer type : multipolygon > > # features : 86790 > > > > These polygons are spread on 2 different countries and the way of > collecting data is different for each country resulting in diffrent > polygons structure > > > > Half of the polygons are 200 meters x 200 meters squares (lower part of > the map) and these seem to be a reference to take into account before any > pre-generalization process. > > > > I’m a bit confused, in the example I found, they choose 5, 10, 20, and 50 > meters for the pre-generalization process. > > I’ve customised it and I’ve added 3 thresholds => 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, > 150, 190 > > > > I stopped at 190, a bit before 200, because there’s no way to generalize a > 200m x 200m square, is it ? > > > > Now, maybe 86790 features is not enough to see a dramatic change in > loading time. > > > > So, my final question is : did I do that properly ? Is it worth > pre-generalizing ? I’m not so sure… > > > > > > > > *Ben* > > > _______________________________________________ > Geoserver-users mailing list > > Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to > this list: > - Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: > http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/ > - The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: > http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html > > If you want to request a feature or an improvement, also see this: > https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Successfully-requesting-and-integrating-new-features-and-improvements-in-GeoServer > > > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users >
_______________________________________________ Geoserver-users mailing list Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this list: - Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/ - The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html If you want to request a feature or an improvement, also see this: https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Successfully-requesting-and-integrating-new-features-and-improvements-in-GeoServer [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users
