This is just an ad-hoc information gathering exercise, since I've seen the question floated many times but never a definitive answer
who is using geoserver as a WFS in production systems? Is it as a "point of truth" or as a public usage data source (if the latter, URLs anyone, and what is the basis of the "contract:" between the provider and a client who has to interpret and trust thre FeatureType?) Public WMS based on geoserver? > If WFS behaviour was less than useful Geoserver would not have any user, > traffic on the mailing lists is proof of the contrary imho. > I see lots of people getting ready for building the next generation of systems, and starting to experiment, and some concerns about robustness as this investigation phase matures. It would be quite useful for the developers list to get a precis of issues on the user lists from time to time. > Not being able to handle complex feature is a pity thought, very much > agreed on that. > We'll get there :-) - I just want to be ready whne the demand comes to have a chance of being stable by then! > Less than ideal performance for WMS is something that needs to be > addressed on specific cases, on the general one, we have very few to do > to improve it more. Specific cases are 256 colors rendering, dataset > caching when they are so small that they fit into memory, tile > caching, and maybe parallel rendering, thought I don't expect it to > make us lots faster on a production server, just faster when the number > of users hittin the server is lower than the number of processors, or > when we're cascading from remote > > Obviously the broad issues, design options and profiling approach are enormously important aspects - and even hacks that allow us to see the potential performance that can be achieved can be useful. > We did not back port any new functionality afaik, besides the CQL > parser. There does seem to be a bit of porting fixes back to 2.3 as well as forwards > My day to day work usually involves (painfully) forward porting > bug fixes to trunk. 2.3.x is "stable", yet still bug ridden. Should > I tell poeple having issues to come back in 3/6 months time, when > a Geosever based on trunk will be ready for production use? > Thats simply a matter of resources - in an ideal world we'd port back until trunk is released, if we are short of resources we make trunk work and try to stop the more painful process of porting changes forward al the time. If something has to give, maybe the users should wait unless they are prepared to resource the extra effort? At least there is a great team of people working hard to keep two significant efforts aligned - I just dream of what could be achieved within a single focussed effort! Rob > Cheers > Andrea > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier. > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Geotools-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier. Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
