On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 09:10:54AM -0500, Andy Colson wrote: >> >> * I see that most of the layers spent around 0,015 seconds for each. Some >> layers spent around 0.25 seconds and I could see that these layers have few >> geometries very complex (I try to break these geometries in others simpler) > > As I see it, you have two options: > > 1) Make an individual request faster (hard to do) > 2) Reduce the number of requests (easier, and different options) > > Do you really need all 120 layers? For one tile you have to make 120 > requests. If it takes 4 tiles to fill out your map, thats 4 * 120 = 480 > requests. If you could combine a few layers you would reduce the > number of requests, and improve performance.
Er, I think your'e confused. His *mapfile* has 120 layers -- 40 of which are 'within range', 80 of which are not, and he's putting those 40 layers into one tile. (This is large, but not excessive; the Boston Freemap had something like 60 layers, and was a pretty simple map, all things considered.) I could be reading this wrong, but I think you're misunderstanding the problem. -- Chris > Have you tried using multiple urls in OpenLayers? > > see: > http://openlayers.org/dev/examples/multiserver.html > > Have you used firebug to watch it load? It has a nice pretty graph that > shows which requests are concurrent, the time for each, etc, etc. > > If you can switch any of your layers to load as a single tile that would > also cut down the number of requests (from 4 to 1 in the example above). > > > -Andy > _______________________________________________ > mapserver-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta _______________________________________________ mapserver-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
