*What kind of clustering are you using? *
*In my environment I have nfs shared datadir and jms clustering and we are
experiencing good enough performances.*
I'm using Active/Active clustering with NFS Shared GWC DIR, shared
database Catalog using JDBCConfig. All the other configuration files that
are not handled by jdbcconfig I sync manually using FreeFileSync between
the machines.
I've also used symbolic links for some files and DIRs. The Data is in NFS
DIR.
I use Apache mod_proxy for load balancing.
Kind regards,
Steve Omondi
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 10:15 PM, Matteo Cusmai <cusmaimat...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> What kind of clustering are you using?
>
> In my environment I have nfs shared datadir and jms clustering and we are
> experiencing good enough performances.
>
>
>
> On 7 Nov 2017 19:09, "Andrea Aime" <andrea.a...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Steve Omondi <steve.omo...@ramani.co.ke>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each
>>> running on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind Apache
>>> HTTPD proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.
>>>
>>> On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.
>>>
>>> On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the Single
>>> Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on Openlayers
>>> client.
>>>
>>> I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
>>> Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;
>>>
>>> - I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers with
>>> a JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
>>> authorization by querying the database and all those processes may slow
>>> the
>>> request.
>>>
>>>
>> This certainly adds work, queries to databases are expensive (how much
>> so, depends a lot on your configuration, network, indexes and the like)
>>
>>>
>>> - JDBCConfig is used in the clustered Geoserver as opposed to XML
>>> Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could be
>>> slowing requests.
>>>
>>> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>> it will be there.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> - The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could be
>>> an issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory seems to
>>> me as a cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my list of
>>> culprits.
>>>
>>> That depends a lot on the network file system in use.
>>
>>
>>> The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as standalone
>>> in front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The have the GWC Blobstore closer
>>> instead of a network drive.
>>>
>>> Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient
>>> and fast"?
>>>
>>> My experience with the Integrated GWC (Six Instances of them which do
>>> not share workload) is definitely slower as I've mentioned 4 -6 times
>>> slower that a single GWC.
>>>
>>
>> Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be built
>> on the fly?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> In fact I have stopped one VM and move the Tiles (GWC dir) to a local
>>> directory in the same machine as the Geoservers but still slower than one
>>> Geoserver.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, the two common topologies are:
>>
>> - Shared network storage, mostly read only, pre-seeded on some other,
>> non online machine
>> - One tile storage per network node, non shared, especially useful
>> for data changes a lot
>>
>> I'd love to see a local storage option that allows picking tiles from
>> other nodes via some clustering technology (e.g., hazelcast distribution),
>> merging the benefits of the two world but... it's missing funding to be
>> developed
>>
>> Cheers
>> Andrea
>>
>> ==
>>
>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
>> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
>> ==
>>
>> Ing. Andrea Aime
>> @geowolf
>> Technical Lead
>>
>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>> Via di Montramito 3/A
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=Via+di+Montramito+3/A+55054+%C2%A0Massarosa&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> 55054 Massarosa
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=Via+di+Montramito+3/A+55054+%C2%A0Massarosa&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> (LU)
>> phone: +39 0584 962313 <0584%20962313>
>> fax: +39 0584 1660272 <0584%20166%200272>
>> mob: +39 339 8844549 <339%20884%204549>
>>
>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>>
>> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>>
>> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
>> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
>> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
>> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
>> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
>> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
>> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
>> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
>> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
>> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>>
>> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
>> for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential
>> or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
>> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
>> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
>> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
>> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
>> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
>> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
>> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
>> does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
>> completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes
>> made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
>> e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geoserver-users mailing list
>>
>> Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to
>> this list:
>> - Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton:
>> http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
>> - The GeoServer user list posting guidelines:
>> http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html
>>
>> Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-users mailing list
Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton:
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines:
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html
Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users
