RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-28 Thread Randy George
Great to see the shootout results.

 

Also interesting to see the Amazon RDS announcement (MySQL based) with
possibility of using quadruple extra large EC2 instances: db.m2.4xlarge - 68
GB of RAM 

http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2009/10/introducing-rds-the-amazon-relational-dat
abase-service-.html

http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2009/10/two-new-ec2-instance-types-additional-mem
ory.html

 

Maybe next shootout the DB layer could look at Amazon RDS(mySQL) and
PostgreSQL/PostGIS using a quadruple extra large instance 68Gb RAM. 

 

After reading Todd Hoff's blog I'd be curious to see if PostGIS could be
configured to make use of large memory capacities and how it affects
performance:

http://highscalability.com/are-cloud-based-memory-architectures-next-big-thi
ng

 

Thanks

Randy

 

 

 

 

From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Craig Miller
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 8:38 PM
To: 'OSGeo Discussions'
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

 

I agree wholeheartedly.  It looks like the bottleneck was the database.
I've been privy to some MapServer tests done by testing teams over several
months and the result there was always deploying the data with long update
cycles to the middle tier disks instead of using the database.  Only then
could the performance of the actual map servers be evaluated.  Performance
shootouts/testing take time to do correctly as each run teaches you more and
more about how your deployment architecture affects the results.

 

Craig

Geospatial Software Engineer

Spatial Minds, LLC http://spatialminds.com/ 

 

From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of antti roppola
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 7:34 PM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

 

It was really interesting. The very close results suggests to me that the
bottlenecks were external to the WMS and more related to external
limitations like the ability to supply things like I/O. It would be
interesting to have profiling data on where the response time was spent. For
Mapserver it'd be a simple case of running Valgrinf and KCacheGrind:

http://kcachegrind.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/show.cgi/KcacheGrindIndex

Case point. We had an in house app for crunching big raster and KCacheGrind
showed us that an external library was the biggest bottleneck.

A.

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Jeff McKenna
jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com wrote:

For those that did not make it to Sydney, here is the WMS Performance
Shootout presentation with results (GeoServer vs MapServer):

http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout

MapServer: power users who manage MapServer sites with high loads/map draws
should
take note of the results of MapServer CGI vs MapServer FastCGI, even in
the case of Shapefiles and Rasters (yes, quite surprising).

All: a lot of credit should go to Andrea Aime from GeoServer who worked very
hard in bringing the MapServer team up to speed to learn the testing
process.  It was a great experience and we're already looking forward to
next year.

-jeff


-- 
Jeff McKenna
FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/








___
mapserver-users mailing list
mapserver-us...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


-- 
Jeff McKenna
FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

 

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-28 Thread Doug_Newcomb
http://magazine.redhat.com/2007/12/12/tip-from-an-rhce-memory-storage-on-postgresql/



Doug Newcomb
USFWS
Raleigh, NC
919-856-4520 ext. 14 doug_newc...@fws.gov
-

The opinions I express are my own and are not representative of the
official policy of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service or Dept. of the
Interior.   Life is too short for undocumented, proprietary data formats.


   
 Randy George
 rkgeo...@cadmaps 
 .com  To 
 Sent by:  'OSGeo Discussions'   
 discuss-boun...@l discuss@lists.osgeo.org   
 ists.osgeo.org cc 
   
   Subject 
 10/28/2009 01:42  RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance 
 PMShootout presentation/results   
   
   
 Please respond to 
 rkgeo...@cadmaps. 
com; Please
respond to 
 OSGeo Discussions 
 disc...@lists.os 
 geo.org  
   
   




Great to see the shootout results.

Also interesting to see the Amazon RDS announcement (MySQL based) with
possibility of using quadruple extra large EC2 instances: db.m2.4xlarge -
68 GB of RAM
http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2009/10/introducing-rds-the-amazon-relational-database-service-.html
http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2009/10/two-new-ec2-instance-types-additional-memory.html

Maybe next shootout the DB layer could look at Amazon RDS(mySQL) and
PostgreSQL/PostGIS using a quadruple extra large instance 68Gb RAM.

After reading Todd Hoff’s blog I’d be curious to see if PostGIS could be
configured to make use of large memory capacities and how it affects
performance:
http://highscalability.com/are-cloud-based-memory-architectures-next-big-thing

Thanks
Randy




From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Craig Miller
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 8:38 PM
To: 'OSGeo Discussions'
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

I agree wholeheartedly.  It looks like the bottleneck was the database.
I’ve been privy to some MapServer tests done by testing teams over several
months and the result there was always deploying the data with long update
cycles to the middle tier disks instead of using the database.  Only then
could the performance of the actual map servers be evaluated.  Performance
shootouts/testing take time to do correctly as each run teaches you more
and more about how your deployment architecture affects the results.

Craig
Geospatial Software Engineer
Spatial Minds, LLC

From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of antti roppola
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 7:34 PM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

It was really interesting. The very close results suggests to me that the
bottlenecks were external to the WMS and more related to external
limitations like the ability to supply things like I/O. It would be
interesting to have profiling data on where the response time was spent.
For Mapserver it'd be a simple case of running Valgrinf and KCacheGrind:

http://kcachegrind.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/show.cgi/KcacheGrindIndex

Case point. We had an in house app for crunching big raster and KCacheGrind
showed us that an external library was the biggest bottleneck.

A.
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Jeff McKenna 
jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com wrote:
For those that did not make it to Sydney, here is the WMS Performance
Shootout presentation with results (GeoServer vs MapServer):

http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout

MapServer: power users who manage MapServer sites with high loads/map draws
should
take note of the results of MapServer CGI vs MapServer FastCGI, even in
the case

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-24 Thread antti roppola
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Andrea Aime aa...@opengeo.org wrote:


 During the benchmark I had very little time to run profilers, but
 the few times I've tried in GeoServer the time seemed to be splitted
 quite equally between data fetching, actual drawing, and output
 image encoding... which is kind of the worst thing you can get out
 of a profile run, since it does not point to any culprit.


OTOH, to me this says that CPU time is mostly being spent where it ought to
be (drawing maps). :o)

Antti
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-24 Thread Guillaume Sueur
Hi,

Thanks for publishing this test for people who couldn't make it to
Sydney. I would be interested in getting the Fcgi configuration of
Mapserver in Apache. Any chance to get that ? 

Regards

Guillaume

Le samedi 24 octobre 2009 à 10:39 +1100, Jeff McKenna a écrit :
 For those that did not make it to Sydney, here is the WMS Performance
 Shootout presentation with results (GeoServer vs MapServer):
 
 http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout
 
 MapServer: power users who manage MapServer sites with high loads/map 
 draws should
 take note of the results of MapServer CGI vs MapServer FastCGI, even in
 the case of Shapefiles and Rasters (yes, quite surprising).
 
 All: a lot of credit should go to Andrea Aime from GeoServer who worked 
 very hard in bringing the MapServer team up to speed to learn the 
 testing process.  It was a great experience and we're already looking 
 forward to next year.
 
 -jeff
 
 
 -- 
 Jeff McKenna
 FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
 http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ___
 mapserver-users mailing list
 mapserver-us...@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
 
 

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-24 Thread Smith, Michael ERDC-USACE-NH
We used a static FCGI specification

FastCgiServer /var/www/cgi-bin/mapserv.fcgi -processes 8 -initial_env
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib:/opt/build/instant_client_11_1/lib:/opt/build
/arcsde_c_sdk/lib

Mike


-- 
Michael Smith
RSGIS Center
US Army Corps of Engineers
w: (603) 646-4765



On 10/24/09 6:36 PM, Guillaume Sueur no-re...@neogeo-online.net wrote:

 Hi,
 
 Thanks for publishing this test for people who couldn't make it to
 Sydney. I would be interested in getting the Fcgi configuration of
 Mapserver in Apache. Any chance to get that ?
 
 Regards
 
 Guillaume
 
 Le samedi 24 octobre 2009 à 10:39 +1100, Jeff McKenna a écrit :
 For those that did not make it to Sydney, here is the WMS Performance
 Shootout presentation with results (GeoServer vs MapServer):
 
 http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout
 
 MapServer: power users who manage MapServer sites with high loads/map
 draws should
 take note of the results of MapServer CGI vs MapServer FastCGI, even in
 the case of Shapefiles and Rasters (yes, quite surprising).
 
 All: a lot of credit should go to Andrea Aime from GeoServer who worked
 very hard in bringing the MapServer team up to speed to learn the
 testing process.  It was a great experience and we're already looking
 forward to next year.
 
 -jeff
 
 
 -- 
 Jeff McKenna
 FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
 http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ___
 mapserver-users mailing list
 mapserver-us...@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
 
 
 
 ___
 Discuss mailing list
 Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-24 Thread Guillaume Sueur
Le samedi 24 octobre 2009 à 21:53 +1100, Smith, Michael ERDC-USACE-NH a
écrit :
 We used a static FCGI specification
 
 FastCgiServer /var/www/cgi-bin/mapserv.fcgi -processes 8 -initial_env
 LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib:/opt/build/instant_client_11_1/lib:/opt/build
 /arcsde_c_sdk/lib
 
 Mike
 
 

So no particular tweaking. thanks for this piece of info. 

regards,

Guillaume

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-24 Thread Jeff McKenna

Smith, Michael ERDC-USACE-NH wrote:

We used a static FCGI specification

FastCgiServer /var/www/cgi-bin/mapserv.fcgi -processes 8 -initial_env
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib:/opt/build/instant_client_11_1/lib:/opt/build
/arcsde_c_sdk/lib



Mike,

I added this info into the shared slides (on the last slide).

-jeff


--
Jeff McKenna
FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/




___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-23 Thread Craig Miller
Anyone know why Mapguide OS wasn't represented?  I'd be happy to set one up
if there is a conference in my area (Seattle/Vancouver BC area).

Craig

 -Original Message-
 From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org]
 On Behalf Of Jeff McKenna
 Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 4:39 PM
 To: osgeo
 Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results
 
 For those that did not make it to Sydney, here is the WMS Performance
 Shootout presentation with results (GeoServer vs MapServer):
 
 http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout
 
 MapServer: power users who manage MapServer sites with high loads/map
 draws should
 take note of the results of MapServer CGI vs MapServer FastCGI, even in
 the case of Shapefiles and Rasters (yes, quite surprising).
 
 All: a lot of credit should go to Andrea Aime from GeoServer who worked
 very hard in bringing the MapServer team up to speed to learn the
 testing process.  It was a great experience and we're already looking
 forward to next year.
 
 -jeff
 
 
 --
 Jeff McKenna
 FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
 http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ___
 mapserver-users mailing list
 mapserver-us...@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
 
 
 --
 Jeff McKenna
 FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
 http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/
 
 
 ___
 Discuss mailing list
 Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-23 Thread Paul Spencer

Unfortunately, no one stepped up to represent mapguide.

Cheers

Paul

On 2009-10-23, at 9:28 PM, Craig Miller wrote:

Anyone know why Mapguide OS wasn't represented?  I'd be happy to set  
one up

if there is a conference in my area (Seattle/Vancouver BC area).

Craig


-Original Message-
From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org

[mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org]

On Behalf Of Jeff McKenna
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 4:39 PM
To: osgeo
Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/ 
results


For those that did not make it to Sydney, here is the WMS Performance
Shootout presentation with results (GeoServer vs MapServer):

http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout

MapServer: power users who manage MapServer sites with high loads/map
draws should
take note of the results of MapServer CGI vs MapServer FastCGI,  
even in

the case of Shapefiles and Rasters (yes, quite surprising).

All: a lot of credit should go to Andrea Aime from GeoServer who  
worked

very hard in bringing the MapServer team up to speed to learn the
testing process.  It was a great experience and we're already looking
forward to next year.

-jeff


--
Jeff McKenna
FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/








___
mapserver-users mailing list
mapserver-us...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


--
Jeff McKenna
FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



__

   Paul Spencer
   Chief Technology Officer
   DM Solutions Group Inc
   http://research.dmsolutions.ca/

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-23 Thread antti roppola
It was really interesting. The very close results suggests to me that the
bottlenecks were external to the WMS and more related to external
limitations like the ability to supply things like I/O. It would be
interesting to have profiling data on where the response time was spent. For
Mapserver it'd be a simple case of running Valgrinf and KCacheGrind:

http://kcachegrind.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/show.cgi/KcacheGrindIndex

Case point. We had an in house app for crunching big raster and KCacheGrind
showed us that an external library was the biggest bottleneck.

A.

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Jeff McKenna 
jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com wrote:

 For those that did not make it to Sydney, here is the WMS Performance
 Shootout presentation with results (GeoServer vs MapServer):

 http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout

 MapServer: power users who manage MapServer sites with high loads/map draws
 should
 take note of the results of MapServer CGI vs MapServer FastCGI, even in
 the case of Shapefiles and Rasters (yes, quite surprising).

 All: a lot of credit should go to Andrea Aime from GeoServer who worked
 very hard in bringing the MapServer team up to speed to learn the testing
 process.  It was a great experience and we're already looking forward to
 next year.

 -jeff


 --
 Jeff McKenna
 FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
 http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/








 ___
 mapserver-users mailing list
 mapserver-us...@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


 --
 Jeff McKenna
 FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
 http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/


 ___
 Discuss mailing list
 Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-23 Thread Craig Miller
I agree wholeheartedly.  It looks like the bottleneck was the database.
I've been privy to some MapServer tests done by testing teams over several
months and the result there was always deploying the data with long update
cycles to the middle tier disks instead of using the database.  Only then
could the performance of the actual map servers be evaluated.  Performance
shootouts/testing take time to do correctly as each run teaches you more and
more about how your deployment architecture affects the results.

 

Craig

Geospatial Software Engineer

Spatial Minds, LLC http://spatialminds.com/ 

 

From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of antti roppola
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 7:34 PM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

 

It was really interesting. The very close results suggests to me that the
bottlenecks were external to the WMS and more related to external
limitations like the ability to supply things like I/O. It would be
interesting to have profiling data on where the response time was spent. For
Mapserver it'd be a simple case of running Valgrinf and KCacheGrind:

http://kcachegrind.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/show.cgi/KcacheGrindIndex

Case point. We had an in house app for crunching big raster and KCacheGrind
showed us that an external library was the biggest bottleneck.

A.

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Jeff McKenna
jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com wrote:

For those that did not make it to Sydney, here is the WMS Performance
Shootout presentation with results (GeoServer vs MapServer):

http://www.slideshare.net/gatewaygeomatics.com/wms-performance-shootout

MapServer: power users who manage MapServer sites with high loads/map draws
should
take note of the results of MapServer CGI vs MapServer FastCGI, even in
the case of Shapefiles and Rasters (yes, quite surprising).

All: a lot of credit should go to Andrea Aime from GeoServer who worked very
hard in bringing the MapServer team up to speed to learn the testing
process.  It was a great experience and we're already looking forward to
next year.

-jeff


-- 
Jeff McKenna
FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/








___
mapserver-users mailing list
mapserver-us...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


-- 
Jeff McKenna
FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

 

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

2009-10-23 Thread Andrea Aime

Craig Miller ha scritto:
I agree wholeheartedly.  It looks like the bottleneck was the database.  
I’ve been privy to some MapServer tests done by testing teams over 
several months and the result there was always deploying the data with 
long update cycles to the middle tier disks instead of using the 
database.  Only then could the performance of the actual map servers be 
evaluated.  Performance shootouts/testing take time to do correctly as 
each run teaches you more and more about how your deployment 
architecture affects the results.


Actually running the benchmarks it looked the CPU was the bottleneck,
we had 25% cpu load in the single test (so 100% of the one CPU
used by that test, out of the 4 available) and during the higher loads
the CPU usage was jumping between 80% and 100% (so almost all 4 cpu
maxed out).

The database server was hardly using more than 25-30% of its CPU
and the network shouldn't have played the bottleneck either (past
experience suggests it takes a tilecache to actually turn a 100Mbit
line into a bottlenek), thought we don't have numbers for that

During the benchmark I had very little time to run profilers, but
the few times I've tried in GeoServer the time seemed to be splitted
quite equally between data fetching, actual drawing, and output
image encoding... which is kind of the worst thing you can get out
of a profile run, since it does not point to any culprit.

Getting a profile out of MapServer is surely going to be interesting,
the codebase is smaller and there is no garbage collection going on
so the results should be clearer. Looking forward to see those results :-)

Cheers
Andrea
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss