WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

[Jeff McKenna]

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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


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


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Craig Miller-6]

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: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]]

> 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
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
>
>
> --
> Jeff McKenna
> FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
> http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Paul Spencer-2]

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: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> 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
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jeff McKenna
>> FOSS4G Consulting and Training Services
>> http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

__________________________________________

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

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[antti roppola-2]

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 <[hidden email]> 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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


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


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Craig Miller-6]

Some javascript/style in this post has been disabled (why?)

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: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] 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 <[hidden email]> 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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


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


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

 

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[aaime]

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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[antti roppola-2]

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Andrea Aime <[hidden email]> 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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Guillaume Sueur-2]

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
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
>
>

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Michael Smith-5]

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: [phone]



On 10/24/09 6:36 PM, "Guillaume Sueur" <[hidden email]> 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
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Guillaume Sueur-2]

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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Randy George]

Some javascript/style in this post has been disabled (why?)

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: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] 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: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] 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 <[hidden email]> 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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


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


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

 

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Doug_Newcomb]

Some javascript/style in this post has been disabled (why?)

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 [hidden email]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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" <[hidden email]>

"Randy George" <[hidden email]>
Sent by: [hidden email]

10/28/2009 01:42 PM

Please respond to
[hidden email]; Please respond to
OSGeo Discussions <[hidden email]>

To	"'OSGeo Discussions'" <[hidden email]>
cc
Subject	RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] WMS Performance Shootout presentation/results

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: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] 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: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] 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 <[hidden email]> 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
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users


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


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss





_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Venkatesh Raghavan]

Hi all,

All good things must come to a close.
and it is a 5 days since the curtains
fell all at FOSS4G-2009-Sydney. Great
job by the organizers and great
conference.

Now is the time to change FOSS4G-2009 logo
on OSGeo site, on your blog and where ever
else you have been good enough to
proudly display it. Let's do it again with
the FOSS4G-2010 logo.

Barcelona!! Here we Come!!!

Cheers!

Venka

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss