I had thought that getCount was supposed to return -1 if it can't  
fullfull the request efficiently...  Or one of the methods was  
supposed to.  I wonder if it is a case where uDig is using the wrong  
method or if Oracle getCount() is implemented wrong.

Jesse

On Aug 29, 2007, at 5:41 AM, Vitali Diatchkov wrote:

>
>
> Just a hint from my mind related to our projects.
>
> There are situations when 20 layers from Oracle are being rendered.  
> The data
> is spread among the whole territory of Finland and the often  
> situation is
> when there is no data to be rendered at the specified scale ratio  
> for 17 of
> 20 layers. But every renderer not only requests features but also  
> calls
> getCount() method to perform real checking to be sure that there is  
> no data
> to be rendered if empty feature collection has come in the beginning.
> getCount() leads to "SELECT count(*) FROM.. WHERE.." and so on in  
> case of
> OracleDataStore - for these 17 layers from 20. Totally we have 3 +  
> (17 * 2)
> requests to the database (if we have 20 layers and only 3 of them  
> contain
> features inside of current Filter). Did not investigate deeply but  
> there
> should be a preference to switch off this getCount() call from  
> renderer in
> case no features were loaded during usual request.
> Isn't it the GT renderer calls this stuff, not UDIG wrappers ?...  
> do not
> remember exactly, but anyway - it would be good optimization to  
> switch off
> this call.
>
> Vitali Diatchkov.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
>> [mailto:geotools-devel-
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrea Aime
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 4:54 PM
>> To: Geotools-Devel list
>> Subject: [Geotools-devel] Various rendering speedups in, feedback
>> appreciated
>>
>> Hi,
>> I've just finished committing quite a raft of rendering speedups.  
>> It's
>> not that they'll
>> make rendering twice as fast, maybe more on the 30% faster (haven't
>> checked
>> seriously, in my gs benchs there is also image encoding which is an
>> important
>> and fixed ratio that my patches haven't touched).
>>
>> Anyways, I would be interested in hearing from others, especially  
>> uDig
>> users,
>> on how the changes are faring. Do you see a visible speedup? Have I
>> introduced
>> any bug in the optimization process?
>>
>> I'll keep on working on this, so these patches are just a first  
>> set of
>> changes
>> for things that were quite visibile and relatively easy to fix.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Andrea
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> ----
>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
>> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
>> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a  
>> browser.
>> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geotools-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ---
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a  
> browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Geotools-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to