Thanks Jeff,

This is very useful information.  I have been experimenting with FlatGeobuf for the last couple of weeks, but I missed the part about setting verify buffer to No. I must continue now to optimize my mapfiles tomorrow. Generally, I am very pleased with the FlatGeobuf files in Mapserver so far.

/Lars Schylberg

Den 2022-04-25 kl. 21:32, skrev Jeff McKenna:
Hi all,

I've spent some effort to document how to enable the optimized FlatGeobuf (FGB) format for vectors in MapServer, for both reading/access as well as steps to output FGB through WFS (you could also use these same steps for WMS GetFeatureInfo output of FGB as well): https://mapserver.org/input/vector/flatgeobuf.html

The user community might be interested also in some performance testing that I've done with FlatGeobuf with MapServer (hardcore developers might question my exact methods, but for general users these results should be interesting).  I've added the results as a note in the Vector Optimization document ( https://mapserver.org/optimization/vector.html )

I used shp2img/map2img to test the map drawing speed for a few popular vector formats (note that these are averaged times, and are not done on a cold connection), with the latest MapServer 8.0-dev code on Windows through MS4W:

  Shapefile  0.011s
  FlatGeobuf 0.014s
  GeoPackage 0.042s
  SpatiaLite 0.045s
  PostGIS    0.053s
  GeoJSON    0.089s

The point is not to cause controversy or start analyzing my simple testing methods, but instead to generally show how optimized FlatGeobuf is for rendering (and filtering) in MapServer, and that we should all be considering this format for sharing vectors through our MapServer services.

Thanks,

-jeff

_______________________________________________
MapServer-users mailing list
MapServer-users@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users

Reply via email to