Wow... Yeah, I totally missed that. I need to stop drinking the heavy
liquor in the morning. :-)
-Andy
Christopher Schmidt wrote:
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
_______________________________________________
mapserver-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
