Sure ! I don't even remember having written that, but actually I think I messed up things between TileCache and OpenLayers as I was having a similar discussion about TileCache WMS and MapServer services ! You are completely right on performance issues.
Regards, Guillaume Paul Spencer a écrit : > I disagree that WMS is more performant, secure and robust than the > mapserv CGI. In fact, WMS is less performant due to some outstanding > performance issues with the PROJ library and EPSG code lookups (see > http://blog.cleverelephant.ca/2009/03/sprint-day-3.html for some details > on upcoming changes that might eliminate this particular problem). > > Can you explain why you think there is more inherent security and > robustness in WMS vs CGI? > > Paul > > On 13-Mar-09, at 3:25 AM, Guillaume Sueur wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> The first one uses WMS and the second one is directly hitting the >> mapfile. For performance, security, robustness and so I would suggest to >> use WMS, but if you don't care about all these (and you can) just use >> .MapServer and use it like your old cgi buddy ! >> >> Regards >> >> Guillaume >> >> MeLv1n wAuRaN a écrit : >>> hi all, >>> >>> what's the difference between OpenLayers.Layer.WMS and >>> OpenLayers.Layer.MapServer? i'm using a mapserver cgi to render my >>> mapfile. so, which one should i use? the wms or the mapserver? >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/users
