Hi Richard, The 'postgis' graph is showing clearly that out of all WMS participating in that test, only Mapnik (paleoserver) scales beyond 64 concurrent requests, which is a very good result, indeed.
Regards, Artem On 15 September 2010 14:12, Richard Weait <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mapnik Fans, > > I'm having a little trouble interpreting this graph, showing the > results from the WMS shootout at FOSS4G. It looks to me like Mapnik, > and Dane's Paleoserver, performed better than any of the other > competitors on the graph. GeoServer, Constellation and Oracle appear > in the legend, but not in the results, so I'm not sure what that > means. > > http://mapnik.org/news/2010/sep/10/wms_benchmarking_2010/ > > Congratulations on the great performance improvement over the last while, > Dane! > _______________________________________________ > 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
