Correct. We've not gotten around to a more formal declaration. Steve
-----Original Message----- From: Brent Fraser [mailto:bfra...@geoanalytic.com] Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 2:57 PM To: Lime, Steve D (DNR) Cc: mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org Subject: RE: [mapserver-users] mapserver 5.6.0, RFC 52 and driver support Steve, One unexpected requirement of using OUTPUTFORMAT/TEMPLATE (RFC 36) for the query results is that I still seem to need a LAYER TEMPLATE definition. It can be set to anything except a zero length string: LAYER : TEMPLATE 'bogus' I guess it's required so Mapserver considers the layer queryable? Thanks! Brent > For those following this thread, I used: > > OUTPUTFORMAT > NAME 'UnassignedWells_select_template' > DRIVER 'TEMPLATE' > MIMETYPE 'text/html' > FORMATOPTION > 'FILE=database\UnassignedWells_select_template_test.html' > END > > and added > > [resultset layer="UnAssignedWells"][feature] > : > [/feature][/resultset] > > around the per-record text in UnassignedWells_select_template_test.html > > But as suspected, it still didn't solve my performance problem... > > Brent > >> I've got: >> OUTPUTFORMAT >> NAME 'UnassignedWells_select_template' >> DRIVER 'TEMPLATE' >> MIMETYPE 'text/html' >> TEMPLATE 'database\UnassignedWells_select_template_test.html' >> #? FORMATOPTION >> 'FILE=database\UnassignedWells_select_template_test.html' >> END >> >> in my map file and a command line of: >> >> mapserv >> QUERY_STRING="mode=nquery&qformat=UnassignedWells_select_template&map=select2_Test.map&qlayer=UnAssignedWells&" >> >> Am I close? >> >> Thanks >> Brent >> >> >>> Yup. What sort of an example would help? >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Brent Fraser [mailto:bfra...@geoanalytic.com] >>> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 4:18 PM >>> To: Lime, Steve D (DNR) >>> Cc: mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org >>> Subject: RE: [mapserver-users] mapserver 5.6.0, RFC 52 and driver >>> support >>> >>> I'd like to give the new-style approach a try, but the doc seems a >>> little >>> thin. You've talking about RFC 36 right? >>> >>>> The new-style approach opens the template only once. That's not your >>>> bottleneck though I bet... >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Brent Fraser [mailto:bfra...@geoanalytic.com] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 3:34 PM >>>> To: Lime, Steve D (DNR) >>>> Cc: mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org >>>> Subject: RE: [mapserver-users] mapserver 5.6.0, RFC 52 and driver >>>> support >>>> >>>>> What kind of templating are you using? The old-style stuff or the >>>>> new-style? How many results you talking? >>>> >>>> Old style. Low 100's of records returned... >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Brent Fraser [mailto:bfra...@geoanalytic.com] >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 3:10 PM >>>>> To: Lime, Steve D (DNR) >>>>> Cc: mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org >>>>> Subject: RE: [mapserver-users] mapserver 5.6.0, RFC 52 and driver >>>>> support >>>>> >>>>> The strange thing is the image render is quick (a few seconds), but >>>>> the >>>>> nquery+mapshape (rectangle) with the processing of the template is >>>>> several >>>>> minutes. And while it opens/reads/closes the template file for each >>>>> record(!), I suspect the majority of the time is spent requesting the >>>>> record and dealing with the result. >>>>> >>>>> Ok, on goes the hacker suit... >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> Brent >>>>> >>>>>> Probably a question better answered by OGR maintainers... In theory >>>>>> working off a single >>>>>> result set, even if you have to traverse it more than once, would be >>>>>> far >>>>>> more efficient >>>>>> than id-based lookups done now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: mapserver-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org >>>>>> [mailto:mapserver-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Brent >>>>>> Fraser >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 2:55 PM >>>>>> To: Lime, Steve D (DNR) >>>>>> Cc: mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org >>>>>> Subject: RE: [mapserver-users] mapserver 5.6.0, RFC 52 and driver >>>>>> support >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you think there would be any point in making the changes for OGR >>>>>> (for >>>>>> my ODBC -> Sql Server connection)? If so, I'll start having a look >>>>>> at >>>>>> the >>>>>> code... >>>>>> >>>>>> Brent >>>>>> >>>>>>> The improvements are limited to native drivers only, principally >>>>>>> Oracle >>>>>>> Spatial and PostGIS. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Steve >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: mapserver-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org >>>>>>> [mailto:mapserver-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Brent >>>>>>> Fraser >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 2:48 PM >>>>>>> To: mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org >>>>>>> Subject: [mapserver-users] mapserver 5.6.0, RFC 52 and driver >>>>>>> support >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've got a query performance problem I'm trying to track down. I >>>>>>> was >>>>>>> hopeful that 5.6 with RFC 52 implemented might help me, but it >>>>>>> seems >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> have no impact. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are the changes for RFC 52 implemented for OGR ODBC connections? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>> Brent Fraser >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> mapserver-users mailing list >>>>>>> mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org >>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> mapserver-users mailing list >>>>>> mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org >>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mapserver-users mailing list >> mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users >> > > _______________________________________________ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users