On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Gabriel Roldán <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is imperative for the WMS performance shootout, always removed GWC >> entirely >> to prove that no caching was going on (or was possible) in the tests. > > yes, it was a design decision to keep it decoupled.
Yup, good good. >> Also, there is a concern that GWC embedded in GeoServer can turn into a disk >> killing bomb: the tile caches can become rather large, as an administrator >> I'd >> like to have GWC around only if I really need it, and to configure it tightly >> to avoid misuse. >> The default GWC configuration instead does not prevent that, which is one >> reason >> why I normally get rid of it unless I'm actually going to use it and >> configure it >> in detail (btw, is the quota functionality ever going to be included >> in GeoServer >> GWC? That's something every conscious admin should configure, along with >> the other service limits). > Agreed. The GWC integration story so far has been kind of weak IMHO. I'm > working towards improving it. Started with truncating the cache based on > transaction's affected bounds, etc. Now this direct WMS integration, > which's disabled by default. And next diskquota may arrive late this > week or the next top, with ability to set a global cache quota limit and > an expiration policy so that tiles least used get removed to keep up > with the quota. Aaah, very good. Wondering, would it be possible (and easy/quick) to have a flag disabling GWC entirely just like we can disable the OGC services? Getting rid of the jars is a more permanent solution, but one that might get into trouble people not familiar with java webapps (not to mention there is no official list of jar to remove) > A per-layer quota limit is also possible, but configuring that from the > GeoServer UI is part of a wider plan, so it'll take longer to arrive. Good to know it's in the plans anyways. >> I guess it would be nice, but it would be better to do that only if GWC >> is around, and without introducing a dependency. Some sort of >> extension point? > right. Reason why I didn't make it so far, just ran out of time to keep > things so nice and didn't want to hack in. > >> Wondering if the extension point that is used to declare the tilesets >> extensions in the capabilities could be also used to drive the OL >> preview configuration. > Guess it has to be a separate one. That one is intended for capabilities > only and used by the inspire and gwc so far. Yeah, I understand > Thanks for the feedback Andrea. Thanks for the improvements ;-) Cheers Andrea ----------------------------------------------------- Ing. Andrea Aime Senior Software Engineer GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via Poggio alle Viti 1187 55054 Massarosa (LU) Italy phone: +39 0584962313 fax: +39 0584962313 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://geo-solutions.blogspot.com/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/andreaaime http://twitter.com/geowolf ----------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) One Node allows customers to consolidate database storage, standardize their database environment, and, should the need arise, upgrade to a full multi-node Oracle RAC database without downtime or disruption http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
