What you describe is pretty much the approach we take. If you are using geotiffs ensure that they are internally tiles (-co TILED=YES) and the you are creating a shptree index on the tile index as noted in the docs. At some point you may want to consider creating a lower resolution mosaics of coverages and using GROUPS and MIN/MAXSCALEDENOM to load the layers at different scales. Make sure to declare the layer's extent as well
Something like: LAYER NAME "full_res_10cm_tiles_withovr" EXTENT 607500.000000 4824000.000000 654000.000000 4859500.000000 TYPE RASTER PROCESSING "RESAMPLE=AVERAGE" TILEINDEX /maps/tindex.shp TILEITEM location GROUP "my_photo" MAXSCALEDENOM 10000 OFFSITE 0 0 0 METADATA "wms_extent" "607500.000000 4824000.000000 654000.000000 4859500.000000" END PROJECTION "init=epsg:2958" END END LAYER NAME "resampled_2m_tiled_bigtif_withovr" EXTENT 607500.000000 4824000.000000 654000.000000 4859500.000000 TYPE RASTER PROCESSING "RESAMPLE=AVERAGE" DATA /maps/2m_overall.tif GROUP "my_photo" MINSCALEDENOM 10000 MAXSCALEDENOM 65000 OFFSITE 0 0 0 METADATA "wms_extent" "607500.000000 4824000.000000 654000.000000 4859500.000000" END PROJECTION "init=epsg:2958" END END On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 at 13:39, Ziegler Stefan <stefan.zieg...@bd.so.ch> wrote: > Hi > > We are using MapServer for vector data stored in a PostgreSQL/PostGIS > database. For a new project we are planning to provide a WMS based on > raster layers and therefore in need of some performance hints or your > experiences. > > The raw data will be a lot of single GeoTIFF (aerials, hillshading, > slopes, etc.) files, like 5'000 - 10'000 from different organizations. > Since the originate from different organizations it's possible that they > can have different resolutions. Conceptionally for aerials it would look > like this: > > Aerial group > |_ aerial from organization one (1000 single tiffs, resolution 10cm, > approx 10k x 10k pixels) > |_ aerial from organization two (600 single tiffs, resolution, 12.5 cm, > approx 10k x 10k pixels) > |_ aerial from organization three (3000 single tiffs, resolution, 10 cm, > approx 10k x 10k pixels) > > For some hundred single GeoTIFFs we have good experience with the > Tileindex approach and an handmade external overview that kicks in at > smaller scale. > > Will this approach still work with a massive amount of single tiffs? Or > are the better ones? What about the compression (quality vs. decompression > speed vs. disk space?) Or would you expect a much better performance with - > let's say - a BigTIFF for each organisation? > > Thanks for any hints. > > Best regards > Stefan > > Freundliche Grüsse > > Stefan Ziegler > Kantonsgeometer / Leiter Amt für Geoinformation > > Amt für Geoinformation > Rötistrasse 4 > 4500 Solothurn > > Telefon +41 32 627 75 96 > stefan.zieg...@bd.so.ch > http://www.so.ch > > > _______________________________________________ > mapserver-users mailing list > mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
_______________________________________________ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users