On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 5:55 AM, Nelson Soto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For performance reasons, I may need to convert SHP's into a spatial > database. I loosely understand the concept of how this work but my > questions to anyone reading are: > > 1. Has anyone looked into specifically doing the above with their > working demo of GeoMoose using SHP files previously? I would hate to > scrap the work I've done utilizing the excellent usability of GeoMoose > in favor of utilizing a spatial database. > > 2. If users are typically accessing data but not writing it, will I > realize a performance upgrade *typically*. > > 3. Is there any functionality I can expect to break and essentially > head into an 'uncharted territory' if I did indeed attempt this. Can I > basically expect to find in my way a high level of techincal issues > (I'm very technical, but I am trying to find an efficient approach) > > Also, here is a description of what I had attempted to do... > > We have an OS X server which contains 2 dual core Xeons processors and > 4GB of ram. We are mainly a Windows house and had aquired the hardware > in an anquisition and would like to utilize this hardware as best as > possible. This is one of our more ambitious products we one day would > like to offer our clients (we currently offer an Access product that > is quite dated.). > > Originally, I had suggested perhaps getting Parellels VM software and > just bringing a copy of Windows Server 2003 to the table, but my > performance almost seems better on my test machine... I'm not sure if > that will apply to concurrent users which is certainly an aspect of > the issue at hand, but the VM software only detects 1 core... not > good. We are not looking at VMWare or anything where the license will > exceed or approach the cost of a new server otherwise we will do so. > > If I host PostgreSQL or MySQL on the server and away from the server > that would host GeoMoose (a new server) I would hopefully like to > utilize the Mac in this way seeing as how I can not get the > performance I would like out of virtualized hosting. > > Yes, I realize I can just set up Mapserver for OS X but, in my > oppinion, it is a very laborious task and I am foreseeing I will be > the one having to maintain this server and while I myself and > relatively comfortable maintaining OS X and its Unix skeleton, I want > to minimize the work I need to do to this server... > > I will post this on GeoMoose mailing list as well as Mapserver as I > realize there is some overlap in exactly what area's this does cover. > While the context of this topic does cover my use of GeoMoose with > Mapserver, I'm thinking there are users on both of these lists that > have experience with the advantages vs disadvantages of Spatial DB > Data vs SHP on disk. > > At any rate, any input is appreciated. > > Thanks, > Nelson > _______________________________________________ > mapserver-users mailing list > mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users >
hi, you havent explained what the performance issues are exactly, but if you're user shapefiles with a large extent, the simplest thing to potentially improve performace is shptree http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/docs/reference/utilityreference/shptree -brent _______________________________________________ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users