The slide show is a good start--thank you! >From my experience, MapServer and GeoServer have poor documentation. I do very much appreciate the OL samples included in GeoServer, and I'm impressed with the fact that GeoServer is available as a WAR file that I can rapidly deploy.
Of greater concern to me is reliability and performance. If anyone has notions of these, I'd be especially interested to know. Many thanks. Mike Quentel -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Schaub Sent: Monday, 03 March 2008 17:51 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OpenLayers-Users] OL users which one is better: MapServer or GeoServer Hey- Mike Quentel wrote: > Hello fellow OL users. Sorry in advance if this seems a bit "off the > topic" (personally, I think it very relevant)... > Yeah, I think this topic shouldn't go too far on this list, but I'll respond anyway. > I know some of you use UMN MapServer, and others use GeoServer, and > still others use a variety of other server-side mapping software. > > MapServer v GeoServer -- which one is better as far as: > > 1. Performance? Better, huh. I think you'll get different answers from different people. Refractions and TOPP co-lead a presentation on WMS performance at the FOSS4G conference this year. You can see their slides showing results from some well-constrained tests: http://www.foss4g2007.org/presentations/view.php?abstract_id=120 > > 2. Stability? My experience is that GeoServer is undergoing more rapid development than MapServer. That is a comment on a different kind of stability than you may be asking about, but it's related. > > 3. Ease of use and configuration/installation? If you're a Windows person MS4W is a snap. If you're a Java person, GeoServer is a snap. If you're not covered by the union of those two sets, then the answer depends on your technical abilities. > > You could also look at this question as: "if I had to start all over > again, I would use...". I've had fun using both - and don't imagine I'd do anything differently. Tim > > Many thanks. > > Mike Quentel > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > !DSPAM:4033,47cc30ba174348992556831! > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/users --------------------------------------------------------------------- This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/users
