OSGeo.org › OSGeo Software and Data Projects › MapServer › Mapserver - Dev

mapserver 5.4 beta performance test

7 messages

mapserver 5.4 beta performance test

Reply Threaded

Hi,

I'd like to share some strange results I've got back when testing
mapserver 5.4 beta on a huge streets postgis layer.

here are the tests :
5.4 beta DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map
-map_debug 5 -o test.png
[Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935351 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets), 1.617s
[Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935551 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache, 0.000s
[Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.619s
[Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24176 msSaveImage() total time: 0.089s
[Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24347 msFreeMap(): freeing map at 0x818f8e0.

real 0m1.719s
user 0m0.284s
sys 0m0.028s

5.4 BETA DEBUG OFF ---------------------------------------------
time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png

real 0m1.994s
user 0m0.408s
sys 0m0.020s

as you can see it goes faster with debug ON (tested several times)

if I try it back with mapserver 5.2 I get :

5.2 DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -map_debug 5 -o
test.png
[Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891334 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets), 1.434s
[Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891549 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache, 0.000s
[Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.437s
[Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43083 msSaveImage() total time: 0.151s
[Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43240 msFreeMap(): freeing map at 0x81878e0.

real 0m1.599s
user 0m0.268s
sys 0m0.016s

5.2 DEBUG OFF -----------------------------------------------

time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png

real 0m1.481s
user 0m0.296s
sys 0m0.008s

So the 5.4beta seems definitely slower than 5.2, and goes even slower
when DEBUG is off.

Is there a special setting activated by default on beta releases which
could explain that ?

Best regards

Guillaume

_______________________________________________
mapserver-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

Guillaume Sueur-2

Re: mapserver 5.4 beta performance test

Reply Threaded

Another weird point :

If I ask for the whole dataset, 5.4 is slower than 5.2 (11 and 9 secs)
but with a filter on an indexed field, I get 0.607s with 5.4 and 2.3s
with 5.2.

If I use the shapefile of the data I get :
whole dataset :
5.4 : 1s
5.2 : 1s
with a filter on :
5.4 : 0.76s
5.2 : 0.76s

So, as far as I can tell, shapefile still goes much faster than PostGIS
layers, with various differences between 5.2 and 5.4
5.2 and 5.4 are equal when dealing with shapefiles.

Does this sound ok for you devs ?

Regards

Guillaume

Guillaume Sueur a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> I'd like to share some strange results I've got back when testing
> mapserver 5.4 beta on a huge streets postgis layer.
>
> here are the tests :
> 5.4 beta DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map
> -map_debug 5 -o test.png
> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935351 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets), 1.617s
> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935551 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache, 0.000s
> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.619s
> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24176 msSaveImage() total time: 0.089s
> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24347 msFreeMap(): freeing map at 0x818f8e0.
>
> real 0m1.719s
> user 0m0.284s
> sys 0m0.028s
>
> 5.4 BETA DEBUG OFF ---------------------------------------------
> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png
>
> real 0m1.994s
> user 0m0.408s
> sys 0m0.020s
>
> as you can see it goes faster with debug ON (tested several times)
>
> if I try it back with mapserver 5.2 I get :
>
> 5.2 DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -map_debug 5 -o
> test.png
> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891334 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets), 1.434s
> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891549 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache, 0.000s
> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.437s
> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43083 msSaveImage() total time: 0.151s
> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43240 msFreeMap(): freeing map at 0x81878e0.
>
> real 0m1.599s
> user 0m0.268s
> sys 0m0.016s
>
> 5.2 DEBUG OFF -----------------------------------------------
>
> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png
>
> real 0m1.481s
> user 0m0.296s
> sys 0m0.008s
>
>
> So the 5.4beta seems definitely slower than 5.2, and goes even slower
> when DEBUG is off.
>
> Is there a special setting activated by default on beta releases which
> could explain that ?
>
> Best regards
>
> Guillaume
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>
>

_______________________________________________
mapserver-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

Paul Ramsey-3

Re: mapserver 5.4 beta performance test

Reply Threaded

I moved from a binary to a text cursor for 5.4, which has a
performance penalty. It also has a huge code simplicity bonus, which I
judged worth it (binary cursors have to be managed within transaction
blocks, which adds a surprisingly high complexity overhead). I changed
the text encoding during the code sprint, so if your test is using
code from before then, the next release should be slightly faster,
though still probably slower than the 5.2 code.

P.

On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Guillaume Sueur
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Another weird point :
>
> If I ask for the whole dataset, 5.4 is slower than 5.2 (11 and 9 secs)
> but with a filter on an indexed field, I get 0.607s with 5.4 and 2.3s
> with 5.2.
>
> If I use the shapefile of the data I get :
> whole dataset :
> 5.4 : 1s
> 5.2 : 1s
> with a filter on :
> 5.4 : 0.76s
> 5.2 : 0.76s
>
> So, as far as I can tell, shapefile still goes much faster than PostGIS
> layers, with various differences between 5.2 and 5.4
> 5.2 and 5.4 are equal when dealing with shapefiles.
>
> Does this sound ok for you devs ?
>
> Regards
>
> Guillaume
>
>
> Guillaume Sueur a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to share some strange results I've got back when testing
>> mapserver 5.4 beta on a huge streets postgis layer.
>>
>> here are the tests :
>> 5.4 beta DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map
>> -map_debug 5 -o test.png
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935351 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets), 1.617s
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935551 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache, 0.000s
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.619s
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24176 msSaveImage() total time: 0.089s
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24347 msFreeMap(): freeing map at 0x818f8e0.
>>
>> real 0m1.719s
>> user 0m0.284s
>> sys 0m0.028s
>>
>> 5.4 BETA DEBUG OFF ---------------------------------------------
>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png
>>
>> real 0m1.994s
>> user 0m0.408s
>> sys 0m0.020s
>>
>> as you can see it goes faster with debug ON (tested several times)
>>
>> if I try it back with mapserver 5.2 I get :
>>
>> 5.2 DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -map_debug 5 -o
>> test.png
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891334 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets), 1.434s
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891549 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache, 0.000s
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.437s
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43083 msSaveImage() total time: 0.151s
>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43240 msFreeMap(): freeing map at 0x81878e0.
>>
>> real 0m1.599s
>> user 0m0.268s
>> sys 0m0.016s
>>
>> 5.2 DEBUG OFF -----------------------------------------------
>>
>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png
>>
>> real 0m1.481s
>> user 0m0.296s
>> sys 0m0.008s
>>
>>
>> So the 5.4beta seems definitely slower than 5.2, and goes even slower
>> when DEBUG is off.
>>
>> Is there a special setting activated by default on beta releases which
>> could explain that ?
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Guillaume
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>

_______________________________________________
mapserver-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

Guillaume Sueur-2

Re: mapserver 5.4 beta performance test

Reply Threaded

Thanks for this piece of info Paul. I'm a bit disappointed by the nearly
10 speed factor difference between PostGIS layer and shapefile layer on
that large dataset. I did my test on my personnal PC though. I will test
that on a fast server as well.

Best regards,

Guillaume

Paul Ramsey a écrit :

> I moved from a binary to a text cursor for 5.4, which has a
> performance penalty. It also has a huge code simplicity bonus, which I
> judged worth it (binary cursors have to be managed within transaction
> blocks, which adds a surprisingly high complexity overhead). I changed
> the text encoding during the code sprint, so if your test is using
> code from before then, the next release should be slightly faster,
> though still probably slower than the 5.2 code.
>
> P.
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Guillaume Sueur
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Another weird point :
>>
>> If I ask for the whole dataset, 5.4 is slower than 5.2 (11 and 9 secs)
>> but with a filter on an indexed field, I get 0.607s with 5.4 and 2.3s
>> with 5.2.
>>
>> If I use the shapefile of the data I get :
>> whole dataset :
>> 5.4 : 1s
>> 5.2 : 1s
>> with a filter on :
>> 5.4 : 0.76s
>> 5.2 : 0.76s
>>
>> So, as far as I can tell, shapefile still goes much faster than PostGIS
>> layers, with various differences between 5.2 and 5.4
>> 5.2 and 5.4 are equal when dealing with shapefiles.
>>
>> Does this sound ok for you devs ?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Guillaume
>>
>>
>> Guillaume Sueur a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'd like to share some strange results I've got back when testing
>>> mapserver 5.4 beta on a huge streets postgis layer.
>>>
>>> here are the tests :
>>> 5.4 beta DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map
>>> -map_debug 5 -o test.png
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935351 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets), 1.617s
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935551 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache, 0.000s
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.619s
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24176 msSaveImage() total time: 0.089s
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24347 msFreeMap(): freeing map at 0x818f8e0.
>>>
>>> real 0m1.719s
>>> user 0m0.284s
>>> sys 0m0.028s
>>>
>>> 5.4 BETA DEBUG OFF ---------------------------------------------
>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png
>>>
>>> real 0m1.994s
>>> user 0m0.408s
>>> sys 0m0.020s
>>>
>>> as you can see it goes faster with debug ON (tested several times)
>>>
>>> if I try it back with mapserver 5.2 I get :
>>>
>>> 5.2 DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -map_debug 5 -o
>>> test.png
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891334 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets), 1.434s
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891549 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache, 0.000s
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.437s
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43083 msSaveImage() total time: 0.151s
>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43240 msFreeMap(): freeing map at 0x81878e0.
>>>
>>> real 0m1.599s
>>> user 0m0.268s
>>> sys 0m0.016s
>>>
>>> 5.2 DEBUG OFF -----------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png
>>>
>>> real 0m1.481s
>>> user 0m0.296s
>>> sys 0m0.008s
>>>
>>>
>>> So the 5.4beta seems definitely slower than 5.2, and goes even slower
>>> when DEBUG is off.
>>>
>>> Is there a special setting activated by default on beta releases which
>>> could explain that ?
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> Guillaume
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>
>
>

_______________________________________________
mapserver-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

Paul Ramsey-3

Re: mapserver 5.4 beta performance test

Reply Threaded

On Mar 31, 2009, at 8:57 AM, Guillaume Sueur wrote:

> Thanks for this piece of info Paul. I'm a bit disappointed by the
> nearly
> 10 speed factor difference between PostGIS layer and shapefile layer
> on
> that large dataset. I did my test on my personnal PC though. I will
> test
> that on a fast server as well.

I'm not too disappointed. Retrieving the entirety of a large table is
degenerate case. As long as the performance remains acceptable in the
"drawing a few thousand features" case, I'm OK with it. Databases are
optimized for random access, not bulk access.

P.

>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Guillaume
>
> Paul Ramsey a écrit :
>> I moved from a binary to a text cursor for 5.4, which has a
>> performance penalty. It also has a huge code simplicity bonus,
>> which I
>> judged worth it (binary cursors have to be managed within transaction
>> blocks, which adds a surprisingly high complexity overhead). I
>> changed
>> the text encoding during the code sprint, so if your test is using
>> code from before then, the next release should be slightly faster,
>> though still probably slower than the 5.2 code.
>>
>> P.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Guillaume Sueur
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Another weird point :
>>>
>>> If I ask for the whole dataset, 5.4 is slower than 5.2 (11 and 9
>>> secs)
>>> but with a filter on an indexed field, I get 0.607s with 5.4 and
>>> 2.3s
>>> with 5.2.
>>>
>>> If I use the shapefile of the data I get :
>>> whole dataset :
>>> 5.4 : 1s
>>> 5.2 : 1s
>>> with a filter on :
>>> 5.4 : 0.76s
>>> 5.2 : 0.76s
>>>
>>> So, as far as I can tell, shapefile still goes much faster than
>>> PostGIS
>>> layers, with various differences between 5.2 and 5.4
>>> 5.2 and 5.4 are equal when dealing with shapefiles.
>>>
>>> Does this sound ok for you devs ?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Guillaume
>>>
>>>
>>> Guillaume Sueur a écrit :
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to share some strange results I've got back when testing
>>>> mapserver 5.4 beta on a huge streets postgis layer.
>>>>
>>>> here are the tests :
>>>> 5.4 beta DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
>>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map
>>>> -map_debug 5 -o test.png
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935351 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets),
>>>> 1.617s
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935551 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label
>>>> Cache, 0.000s
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.619s
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24176 msSaveImage() total time: 0.089s
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24347 msFreeMap(): freeing map at
>>>> 0x818f8e0.
>>>>
>>>> real 0m1.719s
>>>> user 0m0.284s
>>>> sys 0m0.028s
>>>>
>>>> 5.4 BETA DEBUG OFF ---------------------------------------------
>>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map -o
>>>> test.png
>>>>
>>>> real 0m1.994s
>>>> user 0m0.408s
>>>> sys 0m0.020s
>>>>
>>>> as you can see it goes faster with debug ON (tested several times)
>>>>
>>>> if I try it back with mapserver 5.2 I get :
>>>>
>>>> 5.2 DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
>>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -
>>>> map_debug 5 -o
>>>> test.png
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891334 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets),
>>>> 1.434s
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891549 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label
>>>> Cache, 0.000s
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.437s
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43083 msSaveImage() total time: 0.151s
>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43240 msFreeMap(): freeing map at
>>>> 0x81878e0.
>>>>
>>>> real 0m1.599s
>>>> user 0m0.268s
>>>> sys 0m0.016s
>>>>
>>>> 5.2 DEBUG OFF -----------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png
>>>>
>>>> real 0m1.481s
>>>> user 0m0.296s
>>>> sys 0m0.008s
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So the 5.4beta seems definitely slower than 5.2, and goes even
>>>> slower
>>>> when DEBUG is off.
>>>>
>>>> Is there a special setting activated by default on beta releases
>>>> which
>>>> could explain that ?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>>
>>>> Guillaume
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>>
>>
>>

--
Paul Ramsey
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Food, survival gear, weapons, shelter, PostGIS. Go!

_______________________________________________
mapserver-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

Guillaume Sueur-2

Re: mapserver 5.4 beta performance test

Reply Threaded

I agree Paul.
I've just ran a test on a server, and extracting a specific type of
streets on a half extent of the dataset is 1.577s with postgis when no
index is declared on the filter field, 0.167 with an index and 0.494
with shapefile.

Thanks for your hints

Guillaume

Paul Ramsey a écrit :

>
> On Mar 31, 2009, at 8:57 AM, Guillaume Sueur wrote:
>
>> Thanks for this piece of info Paul. I'm a bit disappointed by the nearly
>> 10 speed factor difference between PostGIS layer and shapefile layer on
>> that large dataset. I did my test on my personnal PC though. I will test
>> that on a fast server as well.
>
> I'm not too disappointed. Retrieving the entirety of a large table is
> degenerate case. As long as the performance remains acceptable in the
> "drawing a few thousand features" case, I'm OK with it. Databases are
> optimized for random access, not bulk access.
>
> P.
>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Guillaume
>>
>> Paul Ramsey a écrit :
>>> I moved from a binary to a text cursor for 5.4, which has a
>>> performance penalty. It also has a huge code simplicity bonus, which I
>>> judged worth it (binary cursors have to be managed within transaction
>>> blocks, which adds a surprisingly high complexity overhead). I changed
>>> the text encoding during the code sprint, so if your test is using
>>> code from before then, the next release should be slightly faster,
>>> though still probably slower than the 5.2 code.
>>>
>>> P.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Guillaume Sueur
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Another weird point :
>>>>
>>>> If I ask for the whole dataset, 5.4 is slower than 5.2 (11 and 9 secs)
>>>> but with a filter on an indexed field, I get 0.607s with 5.4 and 2.3s
>>>> with 5.2.
>>>>
>>>> If I use the shapefile of the data I get :
>>>> whole dataset :
>>>> 5.4 : 1s
>>>> 5.2 : 1s
>>>> with a filter on :
>>>> 5.4 : 0.76s
>>>> 5.2 : 0.76s
>>>>
>>>> So, as far as I can tell, shapefile still goes much faster than PostGIS
>>>> layers, with various differences between 5.2 and 5.4
>>>> 5.2 and 5.4 are equal when dealing with shapefiles.
>>>>
>>>> Does this sound ok for you devs ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Guillaume
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Guillaume Sueur a écrit :
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to share some strange results I've got back when testing
>>>>> mapserver 5.4 beta on a huge streets postgis layer.
>>>>>
>>>>> here are the tests :
>>>>> 5.4 beta DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
>>>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map
>>>>> -map_debug 5 -o test.png
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935351 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets),
>>>>> 1.617s
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935551 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache,
>>>>> 0.000s
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:15 2009].935603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.619s
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24176 msSaveImage() total time: 0.089s
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:49:16 2009].24347 msFreeMap(): freeing map at
>>>>> 0x818f8e0.
>>>>>
>>>>> real 0m1.719s
>>>>> user 0m0.284s
>>>>> sys 0m0.028s
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.4 BETA DEBUG OFF ---------------------------------------------
>>>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.4.0-beta3/shp2img -m test.map -o
>>>>> test.png
>>>>>
>>>>> real 0m1.994s
>>>>> user 0m0.408s
>>>>> sys 0m0.020s
>>>>>
>>>>> as you can see it goes faster with debug ON (tested several times)
>>>>>
>>>>> if I try it back with mapserver 5.2 I get :
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.2 DEBUG ON -----------------------------------------------
>>>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -map_debug
>>>>> 5 -o
>>>>> test.png
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891334 msDrawMap(): Layer 0 (streets),
>>>>> 1.434s
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891549 msDrawMap(): Drawing Label Cache,
>>>>> 0.000s
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:01 2009].891603 msDrawMap() total time: 1.437s
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43083 msSaveImage() total time: 0.151s
>>>>> [Tue Mar 31 15:52:02 2009].43240 msFreeMap(): freeing map at
>>>>> 0x81878e0.
>>>>>
>>>>> real 0m1.599s
>>>>> user 0m0.268s
>>>>> sys 0m0.016s
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.2 DEBUG OFF -----------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> time /usr/local/src/mapserver-5.2.0/shp2img -m test.map -o test.png
>>>>>
>>>>> real 0m1.481s
>>>>> user 0m0.296s
>>>>> sys 0m0.008s
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So the 5.4beta seems definitely slower than 5.2, and goes even slower
>>>>> when DEBUG is off.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a special setting activated by default on beta releases which
>>>>> could explain that ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Guillaume
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> Paul Ramsey
> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
> Food, survival gear, weapons, shelter, PostGIS. Go!
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
mapserver-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

Guillaume Sueur-2

Re: mapserver 5.4 beta performance test

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Paul Ramsey-3

_______________________________________________
mapserver-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev