Perhaps you should look into other server options, such as amazon s3. Caching really does speed up performance, it'll allow you to get away with having a less powerful server, which might make up for the difference in cost. Another area to save space would be your method of saving the images. Using PNG256 can really save space,especially as your images only have a few colours. This has the additional advantage of reducing the time that the user waits for the tiles to download.
---- Jay ----- Original Message ----- From: "joel collins" <[email protected]> To: "Frederik Ramm" <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2010 7:51:04 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [Mapnik-users] mapnik performance for on-demand tile generation Thank you for pointing me in the direction of shapeindex. I ran shapeindex and this is now my performance when rendering 1 tile at a time: (southeastern united states, lots of borders) zoom level: seconds / tile 2 12 3 10 4 10 5 5 6 2.6 7 0.8 8 0.5 9 0.5 10 0.5 11 0.3 (below this no boundaries are visible for this particular location) 12 0.1 (anything with no boundaries visible is really fast, but with boundaries visible its over 0.5 seconds) Any tile that has a visible border, even at really high zoom levels (16+) will take .5 seconds to render. The end result is that when browsing my google map, the CPU is pegged at 100% for 10-15 seconds before any tiles show up. I can pre-create all the images at low zoom levels so i'm not concerned with the slow performance there. But anything beyond zoomd level 10 may require too much disk space to pre-create... My stylesheet is very simple right now. A single fill color and a single border color. In reality I will need to have a little more defined styling as well. On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 2:45 AM, Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> wrote: > Joel, > > joel collins wrote: >> >> What can be done to speed up the rendering? Should I be downsampling >> the number of data points in the shape files? We like the high level >> of accuracy that we see in the tiger files but maybe thats what is >> slowing this down? > > Have you created index files using the shapeindex tool? > > You might want to create two versions of your shapes, one downsampled one > full resolution, then configure Mapnik so that the downsampled ones are used > on the lower zoom levels and the high-resolution ones on the higher zoom > levels. (My assumption here is that your performance gets worse for lower > zooms.) > > Bye > Frederik > _______________________________________________ Mapnik-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/mapnik-users _______________________________________________ Mapnik-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/mapnik-users
