Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

Does that solve the performance issues you're having, and make the cluster
performance comparable
to the single instance case?

​I have cloned the Deployment and I want to export the Database Catalog
back to XML first (I have to figure this out, I can't imaging creating the
catalog again). Then I'll perform the test and compare.

Meanwhile, comparing the Single Geoserver with XML Catalog versus 3
Clustered Geoservers with DB Catalog, and all other configurations
remainign the same (i.e. rules, AuthKey Filter, JDBC Group & Role Service),
the Single Geoserver is much faster (4-6 times)​.


It maybe important to mention that, I tried testing WMTS request with
(TileCol X TileRow) in two separate Geoserver Instances. One Geoserver with
Data Security Rules
​ set on workspaces ​
and another instance without Rules. Interestingly WMTS request took average
754ms to GetTile where there are no Rules compared to
2668
​ms with Rules. Both with JDBC Catalog. So I'm still not certain if it's
the JDBC Catalog my problem of the Data Security Authorization comined with
DB Catalog. Investigating further.




Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Steve Omondi 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrea and team,
>>
>> After several tests using jmeter, I have resolved to move my Catalog from
>> DB to XML Catalog.
>>
>
> Does that solve the performance issues you're having, and make the cluster
> performance comparable
> to the single instance case?
>
> I've answered to the other mail
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> ==
>
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 
> 55054  Massarosa
> 
> (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313 <+39%200584%20962313>
> fax: +39 0584 1660272 <+39%200584%20166%200272>
> mob: +39  339 8844549 <+39%20339%20884%204549>
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
> does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
> completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
> made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
> e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Andrea Aime]

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Steve Omondi 
wrote:

> Hi Andrea and team,
>
> After several tests using jmeter, I have resolved to move my Catalog from
> DB to XML Catalog.
>

Does that solve the performance issues you're having, and make the cluster
performance comparable
to the single instance case?

I've answered to the other mail

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313 <+39%200584%20962313>
fax: +39 0584 1660272 <+39%200584%20166%200272>
mob: +39  339 8844549 <+39%20339%20884%204549>

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

Hi Andrea and team,

After several tests using jmeter, I have resolved to move my Catalog from
DB to XML Catalog.
I have asked as question here, I thought I could draw your attention to it
kindly.

*Is their a method to export the Database Catalog (based on JDBCConfig)
back to XML Catalog without loosing the Layers already published.*

http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/JDBCConfig-export-Catalog-to-XML-Catalog-in-GEOSERVER-DAT-DIR-td5341888.html



Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Steve Omondi 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrea,
>>
>> I have read the proposal GISP 155 (https://github.com/geoserver/
>> geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155) and the status indicates that it's completed in
>> the *Geoserver-2.11-beta*. I am using *Geoserver-2.11.2*, was this
>> version released with the improvement?
>>
>>
> Yes , it part of 2.11 and 2.12. But it's an improvement for the standard
> in memory catalog, not for the JDBC one.
>
>
>> Otherwise from which version of Geoserver is the improvement available?
>>
>> Do you have some recommendations for making JDBC Catalog more performant
>> for example would creating materialized views to replace the standard views
>> or add some index for more used objects/tables?
>>
>>
> Fixing the code is pretty much the only approach I'm afraid, it's not that
> the queries take too much time, it's that the code is doing way too
> many very small ones (query latency is killing it, not data
> finding/gathering), what's missing is a layer of caching in between (there
> is already one, but it's not sufficient) so
> that the queries are not run.
> Check the geoserver-devel archives, there is a discussion about it:
> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/jdbcconfig-performance-td5324352.html
>
> So far nothing happened code wise, but it seems the way to go to fix the
> jdbcconfig on typical GetMap/GetTile requests.
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> ==
>
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 
> 55054  Massarosa
> 
> (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 1660272
> mob: +39  339 8844549
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
> does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
> completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
> made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
> e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Andrea Aime]

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Steve Omondi 
wrote:

> Hi Andrea,
>
> I have read the proposal GISP 155 (https://github.com/geoserver/
> geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155) and the status indicates that it's completed in
> the *Geoserver-2.11-beta*. I am using *Geoserver-2.11.2*, was this
> version released with the improvement?
>
>
Yes , it part of 2.11 and 2.12. But it's an improvement for the standard in
memory catalog, not for the JDBC one.


> Otherwise from which version of Geoserver is the improvement available?
>
> Do you have some recommendations for making JDBC Catalog more performant
> for example would creating materialized views to replace the standard views
> or add some index for more used objects/tables?
>
>
Fixing the code is pretty much the only approach I'm afraid, it's not that
the queries take too much time, it's that the code is doing way too
many very small ones (query latency is killing it, not data
finding/gathering), what's missing is a layer of caching in between (there
is already one, but it's not sufficient) so
that the queries are not run.
Check the geoserver-devel archives, there is a discussion about it:
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/jdbcconfig-performance-td5324352.html

So far nothing happened code wise, but it seems the way to go to fix the
jdbcconfig on typical GetMap/GetTile requests.

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

Hi Andrea,

I have read the proposal GISP 155 (https://github.com/geoserver/g
eoserver/wiki/GSIP-155) and the status indicates that it's completed in the
*Geoserver-2.11-beta*. I am using *Geoserver-2.11.2*, was this version
released with the improvement?

Otherwise from which version of Geoserver is the improvement available?

Do you have some recommendations for making JDBC Catalog more performant
for example would creating materialized views to replace the standard views
or add some index for more used objects/tables?

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> Matteo and Steve,
> the clustering modules are officially unsupported (that's why you won't
> find them in releases), and both occasionally need some love (e..g,
> funding) to work better.
> All open source licenses state that you use the software at your own risk,
> but when even the project tells you something is unsupported, it
> often really is :-p
>
> In GeoSolutions we have used both clustering approaches for customer
> projects, but within contracts allowing us to make fixes and changes here
> and there
> as the need occurs.
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matteo Cusmai 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Steve,
>> With jms cluster you don't need jdbc config, because every catalog
>> updates are performed on all nodes.
>>
>> The problem is gwc configurations, it seems that jms cluster doesn't take
>> into account them. I have opened a thread on this issue, but up to now I
>> haven't received any answers.
>>
>> On 8 Nov 2017 07:40, "Steve Omondi"  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>
>>>  Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be
>>> built on the fly?
>>>
>>> ​Both. I pre-seed some area to a certain zoom level, but I'm also
>>> leaving most of the seeding to be done by users on the fly.​
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>>> it will be there.
>>>
>>> ​I didn't quite look at it this way. But actually the JDBCConfig is a
>>> big difference between my clustered environment and the Single Geoserver. I
>>> could be going after GWC but the quesries are most likely the issue.
>>> However, this si a sacrifice I have to make to share the catalog between
>>> different machines.​
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Steve Omondi
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Andrea Aime <
>>> andrea.a...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>>>
 On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Steve Omondi  wrote:

> ​I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each
> running on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind 
> Apache
> HTTPD proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.
>
> On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.
>
> On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the
> Single Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on
> Openlayers client.
>
> I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
> Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;
>
>- I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers
>with a JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
>authorization by querying the database and all those processes may 
> slow the
>request.
>
>
 This certainly adds work, queries to databases are expensive (how much
 so, depends a lot on your configuration, network, indexes and the like)

>
>- JDBCConfig is used in the clustered  Geoserver as opposed to XML
>Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could 
> be
>slowing requests.
>
> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
 https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
 I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
 hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
 it will be there.


>
>- The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could
>be an issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory
>seems to me as a cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my 
> list
>of culprits.
>
> That depends a lot on the network file system in use.


> ​The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as
> standalone in front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

Thanks for the clarification Andrea.

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> Matteo and Steve,
> the clustering modules are officially unsupported (that's why you won't
> find them in releases), and both occasionally need some love (e..g,
> funding) to work better.
> All open source licenses state that you use the software at your own risk,
> but when even the project tells you something is unsupported, it
> often really is :-p
>
> In GeoSolutions we have used both clustering approaches for customer
> projects, but within contracts allowing us to make fixes and changes here
> and there
> as the need occurs.
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matteo Cusmai 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Steve,
>> With jms cluster you don't need jdbc config, because every catalog
>> updates are performed on all nodes.
>>
>> The problem is gwc configurations, it seems that jms cluster doesn't take
>> into account them. I have opened a thread on this issue, but up to now I
>> haven't received any answers.
>>
>> On 8 Nov 2017 07:40, "Steve Omondi"  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Andrea,
>>>
>>>  Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be
>>> built on the fly?
>>>
>>> ​Both. I pre-seed some area to a certain zoom level, but I'm also
>>> leaving most of the seeding to be done by users on the fly.​
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>>> it will be there.
>>>
>>> ​I didn't quite look at it this way. But actually the JDBCConfig is a
>>> big difference between my clustered environment and the Single Geoserver. I
>>> could be going after GWC but the quesries are most likely the issue.
>>> However, this si a sacrifice I have to make to share the catalog between
>>> different machines.​
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Steve Omondi
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Andrea Aime <
>>> andrea.a...@geo-solutions.it> wrote:
>>>
 On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Steve Omondi  wrote:

> ​I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each
> running on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind 
> Apache
> HTTPD proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.
>
> On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.
>
> On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the
> Single Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on
> Openlayers client.
>
> I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
> Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;
>
>- I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers
>with a JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
>authorization by querying the database and all those processes may 
> slow the
>request.
>
>
 This certainly adds work, queries to databases are expensive (how much
 so, depends a lot on your configuration, network, indexes and the like)

>
>- JDBCConfig is used in the clustered  Geoserver as opposed to XML
>Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could 
> be
>slowing requests.
>
> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
 https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
 I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
 hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
 it will be there.


>
>- The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could
>be an issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory
>seems to me as a cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my 
> list
>of culprits.
>
> That depends a lot on the network file system in use.


> ​The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as
> standalone in front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The have the GWC
> Blobstore closer instead of a network drive.
>
>   Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient
> and fast"?
>
> My experience with the Integrated GWC (Six Instances of them which do
> not share workload) is definitely slower as I've mentioned 4 -6 times
> slower that a single GWC.
>

 Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be
 built on the fly?


>
> In fact 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver Data Security Checks

[Steve Omondi]

A SecurityFilter that talks to a remote GeoServer is certainly possible if
someone wanted to write one, although it would lose some of the benefit of
caching since it would be going to the back end for a security check each
request.

​This would be great. It could be implemented with an option to force GWC
to go to the backend Geoserver and perform security check just like the
Integrated GWC​ with the *Enable Data Security*


*[image: Inline image 1]*

So depending on whether I choose to E*nable Data Security Checks *or not
then GWC can leverage the *SecurityFilter *for the Tilesets.

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 5:30 AM, Kevin Smith  wrote:

> On 2017-11-07 12:45 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Steve Omondi 
> wrote:
>
>> *How do I use GWC in front of multiple Geoservers with data security
>> checks (Rules) workin and perform Authorization for the layers being
>> accessed and the seeded tiles? How do I mage Stand alone GWC perform Data
>> Security Check like the Embedded GWC does?*
>>
>>
> To the best of my knowledge, you don't. Security integration happens only
> if you run GWC embedded in GeoServer,
> a stand-alone GWC has no notion of security at all (can be developed of
> course, but does not seem a trivial task).
>
>
> The most recent stand alone GWC (1.12) has the notion of data security
> (the new SecurityFilter extension point).  It just doesn't have anything
> more than a notion as the only implementation of SecurityFilter so far is
> in GeoServer.
>
> A SecurityFilter that talks to a remote GeoServer is certainly possible if
> someone wanted to write one, although it would lose some of the benefit of
> caching since it would be going to the back end for a security check each
> request.
>
> --
> Kevin Michael Smith 
>
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Geoserver-users mailing list
>
> Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to
> this list:
> - Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton:
> http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
> - The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: http://geoserver.org/comm/
> userlist-guidelines.html
>
> Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Andrea Aime]

Matteo and Steve,
the clustering modules are officially unsupported (that's why you won't
find them in releases), and both occasionally need some love (e..g,
funding) to work better.
All open source licenses state that you use the software at your own risk,
but when even the project tells you something is unsupported, it
often really is :-p

In GeoSolutions we have used both clustering approaches for customer
projects, but within contracts allowing us to make fixes and changes here
and there
as the need occurs.

Cheers
Andrea


On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Matteo Cusmai 
wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> With jms cluster you don't need jdbc config, because every catalog updates
> are performed on all nodes.
>
> The problem is gwc configurations, it seems that jms cluster doesn't take
> into account them. I have opened a thread on this issue, but up to now I
> haven't received any answers.
>
> On 8 Nov 2017 07:40, "Steve Omondi"  wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrea,
>>
>>  Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be
>> built on the fly?
>>
>> ​Both. I pre-seed some area to a certain zoom level, but I'm also leaving
>> most of the seeding to be done by users on the fly.​
>>
>>
>> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>> it will be there.
>>
>> ​I didn't quite look at it this way. But actually the JDBCConfig is a big
>> difference between my clustered environment and the Single Geoserver. I
>> could be going after GWC but the quesries are most likely the issue.
>> However, this si a sacrifice I have to make to share the catalog between
>> different machines.​
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Steve Omondi
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Andrea Aime > > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Steve Omondi 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 ​I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each
 running on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind Apache
 HTTPD proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.

 On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.

 On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the
 Single Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on
 Openlayers client.

 I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
 Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;

- I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers with
a JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
authorization by querying the database and all those processes may slow 
 the
request.


>>> This certainly adds work, queries to databases are expensive (how much
>>> so, depends a lot on your configuration, network, indexes and the like)
>>>

- JDBCConfig is used in the clustered  Geoserver as opposed to XML
Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could 
 be
slowing requests.

 Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>>> it will be there.
>>>
>>>

- The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could be
an issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory seems to
me as a cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my list of
culprits.

 That depends a lot on the network file system in use.
>>>
>>>
 ​The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as
 standalone in front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The have the GWC
 Blobstore closer instead of a network drive.

   Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient
 and fast"?

 My experience with the Integrated GWC (Six Instances of them which do
 not share workload) is definitely slower as I've mentioned 4 -6 times
 slower that a single GWC.

>>>
>>> Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be
>>> built on the fly?
>>>
>>>

 In fact I have stopped one VM and move the Tiles (GWC dir) to a local
 directory in the same machine as the Geoservers but still slower than one
 Geoserver.

>>>
>>> Yeah, the two common topologies are:
>>>
>>>- Shared network storage, mostly read only, pre-seeded on some
>>>other, non online 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

Yes Matteo,

I'm wondering if I could have used that but then I wanted the database
catalog and JDBC Role Service together with monitoring so I could do other
quaeries with the database outside Geoserver environment. Which seems to be
costly now.

I may have to switch in the next upgrade.

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Matteo Cusmai 
wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> With jms cluster you don't need jdbc config, because every catalog updates
> are performed on all nodes.
>
> The problem is gwc configurations, it seems that jms cluster doesn't take
> into account them. I have opened a thread on this issue, but up to now I
> haven't received any answers.
>
> On 8 Nov 2017 07:40, "Steve Omondi"  wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrea,
>>
>>  Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be
>> built on the fly?
>>
>> ​Both. I pre-seed some area to a certain zoom level, but I'm also leaving
>> most of the seeding to be done by users on the fly.​
>>
>>
>> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>> it will be there.
>>
>> ​I didn't quite look at it this way. But actually the JDBCConfig is a big
>> difference between my clustered environment and the Single Geoserver. I
>> could be going after GWC but the quesries are most likely the issue.
>> However, this si a sacrifice I have to make to share the catalog between
>> different machines.​
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Steve Omondi
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Andrea Aime > > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Steve Omondi 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 ​I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each
 running on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind Apache
 HTTPD proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.

 On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.

 On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the
 Single Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on
 Openlayers client.

 I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
 Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;

- I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers with
a JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
authorization by querying the database and all those processes may slow 
 the
request.


>>> This certainly adds work, queries to databases are expensive (how much
>>> so, depends a lot on your configuration, network, indexes and the like)
>>>

- JDBCConfig is used in the clustered  Geoserver as opposed to XML
Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could 
 be
slowing requests.

 Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>>> it will be there.
>>>
>>>

- The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could be
an issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory seems to
me as a cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my list of
culprits.

 That depends a lot on the network file system in use.
>>>
>>>
 ​The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as
 standalone in front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The have the GWC
 Blobstore closer instead of a network drive.

   Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient
 and fast"?

 My experience with the Integrated GWC (Six Instances of them which do
 not share workload) is definitely slower as I've mentioned 4 -6 times
 slower that a single GWC.

>>>
>>> Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be
>>> built on the fly?
>>>
>>>

 In fact I have stopped one VM and move the Tiles (GWC dir) to a local
 directory in the same machine as the Geoservers but still slower than one
 Geoserver.

>>>
>>> Yeah, the two common topologies are:
>>>
>>>- Shared network storage, mostly read only, pre-seeded on some
>>>other, non online machine
>>>- One tile storage per network node, non shared, especially useful
>>>for data changes a lot
>>>
>>> I'd love to see a local storage option that allows picking tiles from
>>> other nodes via 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Matteo Cusmai]

Hi Steve,
With jms cluster you don't need jdbc config, because every catalog updates
are performed on all nodes.

The problem is gwc configurations, it seems that jms cluster doesn't take
into account them. I have opened a thread on this issue, but up to now I
haven't received any answers.

On 8 Nov 2017 07:40, "Steve Omondi"  wrote:

> Hi Andrea,
>
>  Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be built
> on the fly?
>
> ​Both. I pre-seed some area to a certain zoom level, but I'm also leaving
> most of the seeding to be done by users on the fly.​
>
>
> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
> it will be there.
>
> ​I didn't quite look at it this way. But actually the JDBCConfig is a big
> difference between my clustered environment and the Single Geoserver. I
> could be going after GWC but the quesries are most likely the issue.
> However, this si a sacrifice I have to make to share the catalog between
> different machines.​
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Steve Omondi
>
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Andrea Aime 
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Steve Omondi 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ​I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each
>>> running on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind Apache
>>> HTTPD proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.
>>>
>>> On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.
>>>
>>> On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the Single
>>> Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on Openlayers
>>> client.
>>>
>>> I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
>>> Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;
>>>
>>>- I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers with
>>>a JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
>>>authorization by querying the database and all those processes may slow 
>>> the
>>>request.
>>>
>>>
>> This certainly adds work, queries to databases are expensive (how much
>> so, depends a lot on your configuration, network, indexes and the like)
>>
>>>
>>>- JDBCConfig is used in the clustered  Geoserver as opposed to XML
>>>Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could be
>>>slowing requests.
>>>
>>> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>> it will be there.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>- The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could be
>>>an issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory seems to
>>>me as a cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my list of
>>>culprits.
>>>
>>> That depends a lot on the network file system in use.
>>
>>
>>> ​The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as standalone
>>> in front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The have the GWC Blobstore closer
>>> instead of a network drive.
>>>
>>>   Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient
>>> and fast"?
>>>
>>> My experience with the Integrated GWC (Six Instances of them which do
>>> not share workload) is definitely slower as I've mentioned 4 -6 times
>>> slower that a single GWC.
>>>
>>
>> Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be built
>> on the fly?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> In fact I have stopped one VM and move the Tiles (GWC dir) to a local
>>> directory in the same machine as the Geoservers but still slower than one
>>> Geoserver.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, the two common topologies are:
>>
>>- Shared network storage, mostly read only, pre-seeded on some other,
>>non online machine
>>- One tile storage per network node, non shared, especially useful
>>for data changes a lot
>>
>> I'd love to see a local storage option that allows picking tiles from
>> other nodes via some clustering technology (e.g., hazelcast distribution),
>> merging the benefits of the two world but... it's missing funding to be
>> developed
>>
>> Cheers
>> Andrea
>>
>> ==
>>
>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
>> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
>> ==
>>
>> Ing. Andrea Aime
>> @geowolf
>> Technical Lead
>>
>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>> Via di Montramito 3/A
>> 
>> 55054  Massarosa
>> 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

Hi Andrea,

 Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be built
on the fly?

​Both. I pre-seed some area to a certain zoom level, but I'm also leaving
most of the seeding to be done by users on the fly.​


Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of 2017,
it contains some performance numbers too:
https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
it will be there.

​I didn't quite look at it this way. But actually the JDBCConfig is a big
difference between my clustered environment and the Single Geoserver. I
could be going after GWC but the quesries are most likely the issue.
However, this si a sacrifice I have to make to share the catalog between
different machines.​


Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Steve Omondi 
> wrote:
>
>> ​I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each
>> running on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind Apache
>> HTTPD proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.
>>
>> On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.
>>
>> On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the Single
>> Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on Openlayers
>> client.
>>
>> I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
>> Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;
>>
>>- I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers with a
>>JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
>>authorization by querying the database and all those processes may slow 
>> the
>>request.
>>
>>
> This certainly adds work, queries to databases are expensive (how much so,
> depends a lot on your configuration, network, indexes and the like)
>
>>
>>- JDBCConfig is used in the clustered  Geoserver as opposed to XML
>>Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could be
>>slowing requests.
>>
>> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
> it will be there.
>
>
>>
>>- The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could be
>>an issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory seems to
>>me as a cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my list of
>>culprits.
>>
>> That depends a lot on the network file system in use.
>
>
>> ​The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as standalone
>> in front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The have the GWC Blobstore closer
>> instead of a network drive.
>>
>>   Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient
>> and fast"?
>>
>> My experience with the Integrated GWC (Six Instances of them which do not
>> share workload) is definitely slower as I've mentioned 4 -6 times slower
>> that a single GWC.
>>
>
> Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be built
> on the fly?
>
>
>>
>> In fact I have stopped one VM and move the Tiles (GWC dir) to a local
>> directory in the same machine as the Geoservers but still slower than one
>> Geoserver.
>>
>
> Yeah, the two common topologies are:
>
>- Shared network storage, mostly read only, pre-seeded on some other,
>non online machine
>- One tile storage per network node, non shared, especially useful for
>data changes a lot
>
> I'd love to see a local storage option that allows picking tiles from
> other nodes via some clustering technology (e.g., hazelcast distribution),
> merging the benefits of the two world but... it's missing funding to be
> developed
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> ==
>
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 
> 55054  Massarosa
> 
> (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 1660272
> mob: +39  339 8844549
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

*What kind of clustering are you using? *

*In my environment I have nfs shared datadir and jms clustering and we are
experiencing good enough performances.*

​I'm using Active/Active clustering with​ NFS Shared GWC DIR, shared
database Catalog using JDBCConfig. All the other configuration files that
are not handled by jdbcconfig I sync manually using FreeFileSync between
the machines.


I've also used symbolic links for some files and DIRs. The Data is in NFS
DIR.

I use Apache mod_proxy for load balancing.

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 10:15 PM, Matteo Cusmai 
wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> What kind of clustering are you using?
>
> In my environment I have nfs shared datadir and jms clustering and we are
> experiencing good enough performances.
>
>
>
> On 7 Nov 2017 19:09, "Andrea Aime"  wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Steve Omondi 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ​I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each
>>> running on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind Apache
>>> HTTPD proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.
>>>
>>> On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.
>>>
>>> On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the Single
>>> Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on Openlayers
>>> client.
>>>
>>> I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
>>> Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;
>>>
>>>- I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers with
>>>a JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
>>>authorization by querying the database and all those processes may slow 
>>> the
>>>request.
>>>
>>>
>> This certainly adds work, queries to databases are expensive (how much
>> so, depends a lot on your configuration, network, indexes and the like)
>>
>>>
>>>- JDBCConfig is used in the clustered  Geoserver as opposed to XML
>>>Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could be
>>>slowing requests.
>>>
>>> Yes, this is well known, see this proposal I made at the beginning of
>> 2017, it contains some performance numbers too:
>> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-155
>> I cannot tell you how much of those 80ms are weighting on WMTS calls
>> hitting already cached tiles on the embedded GWC, but I'm confident part of
>> it will be there.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>- The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could be
>>>an issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory seems to
>>>me as a cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my list of
>>>culprits.
>>>
>>> That depends a lot on the network file system in use.
>>
>>
>>> ​The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as standalone
>>> in front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The have the GWC Blobstore closer
>>> instead of a network drive.
>>>
>>>   Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient
>>> and fast"?
>>>
>>> My experience with the Integrated GWC (Six Instances of them which do
>>> not share workload) is definitely slower as I've mentioned 4 -6 times
>>> slower that a single GWC.
>>>
>>
>> Are you talking about serving cached tiles or tiles that need to be built
>> on the fly?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> In fact I have stopped one VM and move the Tiles (GWC dir) to a local
>>> directory in the same machine as the Geoservers but still slower than one
>>> Geoserver.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, the two common topologies are:
>>
>>- Shared network storage, mostly read only, pre-seeded on some other,
>>non online machine
>>- One tile storage per network node, non shared, especially useful
>>for data changes a lot
>>
>> I'd love to see a local storage option that allows picking tiles from
>> other nodes via some clustering technology (e.g., hazelcast distribution),
>> merging the benefits of the two world but... it's missing funding to be
>> developed
>>
>> Cheers
>> Andrea
>>
>> ==
>>
>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
>> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
>> ==
>>
>> Ing. Andrea Aime
>> @geowolf
>> Technical Lead
>>
>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>> Via di Montramito 3/A
>> 
>> 55054  Massarosa
>> 
>> (LU)
>> phone: +39 0584 962313 <0584%20962313>
>> fax: +39 0584 1660272 <0584%20166%200272>
>> mob: +39  339 8844549 <339%20884%204549>
>>
>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>>
>> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>>
>> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
>> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
>> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver Data Security Checks

[Kevin Smith]

On 2017-11-07 12:45 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Steve Omondi
> > wrote:
>
> *How do I use GWC in front of multiple Geoservers with data
> security checks (Rules) workin and perform Authorization for the
> layers being accessed and the seeded tiles? How do I mage Stand
> alone GWC perform Data Security Check like the Embedded GWC does?*
> *
> *
>
>
> To the best of my knowledge, you don't. Security integration happens
> only if you run GWC embedded in GeoServer,
> a stand-alone GWC has no notion of security at all (can be developed
> of course, but does not seem a trivial task).

The most recent stand alone GWC (1.12) has the notion of data security
(the new SecurityFilter extension point).  It just doesn't have anything
more than a notion as the only implementation of SecurityFilter so far
is in GeoServer. 

A SecurityFilter that talks to a remote GeoServer is certainly possible
if someone wanted to write one, although it would lose some of the
benefit of caching since it would be going to the back end for a
security check each request.

-- 
Kevin Michael Smith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

​I have 6 Geoservers + Embedded GWC spread on two VMs 3 each. Each running
on separate Tomcat. All the Six Geoserver are running behind Apache HTTPD
proxy Balancer. I tried tuning the Java Process setting to optimum.

On the other hand I had a single Geoserver+ Embedded GWC.

On performing tests, The 6 Geoserver are 4-6 time slower than the Single
Geoserver while rendering a layergroup of HR Aerial Imagery on Openlayers
client.

I made a list of the configuration differences between the clustered
Geoservers and the Single Geoserver and some of the items are;

   - I use Authkey for Authentication in the Clustered Geoservers with a
   JDBC Role Service - so maybe every tile request has to perform
   authorization by querying the database and all those processes may slow the
   request.
   - JDBCConfig is used in the clustered  Geoserver as opposed to XML
   Catalog in the Single Geoserver; same as above the query process could be
   slowing requests.
   - The fact that *GWC Directory and Diskquota are clustered could be an
   issues*; write/access speed of the remote GWC directory seems to me as a
   cause of slow rendering of tiles and as so it tops my list of culprits.

​The third point is the source of my motivation to run GWC as standalone in
front of the Geoserver Cluster proxy. The have the GWC Blobstore closer
instead of a network drive.

  Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient and
fast"?

My experience with the Integrated GWC (Six Instances of them which do not
share workload) is definitely slower as I've mentioned 4 -6 times slower
that a single GWC.

In fact I have stopped one VM and move the Tiles (GWC dir) to a local
directory in the same machine as the Geoservers but still slower than one
Geoserver.

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Steve Omondi 
> wrote:
>
>> Of course I'm interested to know of other approaches to achieve this
>> without writing other software. Or, any one offer me advice on tuning
>> Embedded GWC on multiple Geoservers to perform as efficient and fast as
>> Standalone GWC.
>>
>
> Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient and fast"?
> The integrated one has performance upsides (does not need to encode and
> decode the metatile in PNG) and downside (cannot spread a seeding job
> across all available GeoServer instances, will do it on the local one, you
> have to decide how to decide how to handle the multiple cache writers), and
> there are probably
> other performances related differences that I'm not thinking about right
> now.
>
> Are you after anything specific? Several years ago the stand alone
> approach was favored in high performance setups, nowadays
> I'm mostly seeing installations using the integrated one (mostly due to
> convenience).
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 
> 55054  Massarosa
> 
> (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 1660272
> mob: +39  339 8844549
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
> does not give any warranty or accept 

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Andrea Aime]

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Steve Omondi 
wrote:

> Of course I'm interested to know of other approaches to achieve this
> without writing other software. Or, any one offer me advice on tuning
> Embedded GWC on multiple Geoservers to perform as efficient and fast as
> Standalone GWC.
>

Can you elaborate what you mean by "as efficient and fast"?
The integrated one has performance upsides (does not need to encode and
decode the metatile in PNG) and downside (cannot spread a seeding job
across all available GeoServer instances, will do it on the local one, you
have to decide how to decide how to handle the multiple cache writers), and
there are probably
other performances related differences that I'm not thinking about right
now.

Are you after anything specific? Several years ago the stand alone approach
was favored in high performance setups, nowadays
I'm mostly seeing installations using the integrated one (mostly due to
convenience).

Cheers
Andrea

==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Steve Omondi]

​Yes exactly.​

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Paul Wittle <p.wit...@dorsetcc.gov.uk>
wrote:

> Ah,
>
>
>
> I see; you meant you wanted to apply the GeoServer rules directly to the
> incoming requests but on standalone. I was thinking about the requests from
> GWC to GeoServer.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Omondi [mailto:steve.omo...@ramani.co.ke]
> *Sent:* 07 November 2017 12:33
> *To:* Paul Wittle <p.wit...@dorsetcc.gov.uk>
> *Cc:* geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net; andrea.a...@geo-solutions.it
> *Subject:* Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver
>
>
>
> Hi Paul, my case is not really what is in the discussion.
>
>
>
> I have un-controlled number of users sending request for different layers
> (over 1000 layers and growing). Each user has an AuthKey (Based on the
> AuthKey Module). The Authkey is queried from the Database per user and
> added to the WMS request URL for Authorization. ALl this is dynamic and I
> don't have the luxary of setting the authkey property in the
> geowebcache.xml.
>
>
>
> In fact for my case I can't even set the layers one by one in the
> geowebcache.xml, I have used WMS getCapabilities in the
> Geowebcache-core-context.xml to load all the WMS layers at once.
>
>
>
> My desired solution would be how to parse the Authkey to the final request
> URL sent to geoserver by the GWc request to check data security and
> restrict access to layers and the already seeded tiles.
>
>
>
> For quick turnaround for my application I'm now doing an Authentication +
> Authorization Service in front of GWC and I'm also removing all the Data
> Security Rules in the Geoservers. This way the Authorization will now be
> checked even before the request hits GWC without depending on Geoserver
> Subsecurity System.
>
>
>
> Of course I'm interested to know of other approaches to achieve this
> without writing other software. Or, any one offer me advice on tuning
> Embedded GWC on multiple Geoservers to perform as efficient and fast as
> Standalone GWC.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Steve Omondi
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Paul Wittle <p.wit...@dorsetcc.gov.uk>
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Is the option referenced in this message thread not related to passing
> credentials with the requests?
>
>
>
> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/How-can-I-
> configure-user-name-password-in-geowebcache-xml-for-
> wmslayers-td5023835.html
>
>
>
> I was trying to use the same settings unsuccessfully but I don’t know why
> I thought something had moved on; perhaps not.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paul
>
> "This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain
> information about individuals or other sensitive information and should be
> handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to
> receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to
> anyone else. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregard the
> content of the message and notify the sender immediately. Please be aware
> that all email may be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance
> with relevant legislation."
>
>
> "This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain
> information about individuals or other sensitive information and should be
> handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to
> receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to
> anyone else. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregard the
> content of the message and notify the sender immediately. Please be aware
> that all email may be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance
> with relevant legislation."
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Paul Wittle via Geoserver-users]

Ah,

I see; you meant you wanted to apply the GeoServer rules directly to the 
incoming requests but on standalone. I was thinking about the requests from GWC 
to GeoServer.

Paul

From: Steve Omondi [mailto:steve.omo...@ramani.co.ke]
Sent: 07 November 2017 12:33
To: Paul Wittle <p.wit...@dorsetcc.gov.uk>
Cc: geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net; andrea.a...@geo-solutions.it
Subject: Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

Hi Paul, my case is not really what is in the discussion.

I have un-controlled number of users sending request for different layers (over 
1000 layers and growing). Each user has an AuthKey (Based on the AuthKey 
Module). The Authkey is queried from the Database per user and added to the WMS 
request URL for Authorization. ALl this is dynamic and I don't have the luxary 
of setting the authkey property in the geowebcache.xml.

In fact for my case I can't even set the layers one by one in the 
geowebcache.xml, I have used WMS getCapabilities in the 
Geowebcache-core-context.xml to load all the WMS layers at once.

My desired solution would be how to parse the Authkey to the final request URL 
sent to geoserver by the GWc request to check data security and restrict access 
to layers and the already seeded tiles.

For quick turnaround for my application I'm now doing an Authentication + 
Authorization Service in front of GWC and I'm also removing all the Data 
Security Rules in the Geoservers. This way the Authorization will now be 
checked even before the request hits GWC without depending on Geoserver 
Subsecurity System.

Of course I'm interested to know of other approaches to achieve this without 
writing other software. Or, any one offer me advice on tuning Embedded GWC on 
multiple Geoservers to perform as efficient and fast as Standalone GWC.

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Paul Wittle 
<p.wit...@dorsetcc.gov.uk<mailto:p.wit...@dorsetcc.gov.uk>> wrote:
Hi,

Is the option referenced in this message thread not related to passing 
credentials with the requests?

http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/How-can-I-configure-user-name-password-in-geowebcache-xml-for-wmslayers-td5023835.html

I was trying to use the same settings unsuccessfully but I don’t know why I 
thought something had moved on; perhaps not.

Cheers,
Paul
"This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain 
information about individuals or other sensitive information and should be 
handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to 
receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to 
anyone else. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregard the 
content of the message and notify the sender immediately. Please be aware that 
all email may be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance with 
relevant legislation."

"This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain 
information about individuals or other sensitive information and should be 
handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to 
receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to 
anyone else. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregard the 
content of the message and notify the sender immediately. Please be aware that 
all email may be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance with 
relevant legislation."
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver

[Paul Wittle via Geoserver-users]

Hi,

Is the option referenced in this message thread not related to passing 
credentials with the requests?

http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/How-can-I-configure-user-name-password-in-geowebcache-xml-for-wmslayers-td5023835.html

I was trying to use the same settings unsuccessfully but I don't know why I 
thought something had moved on; perhaps not.

Cheers,
Paul
"This e-mail is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain 
information about individuals or other sensitive information and should be 
handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to 
receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to 
anyone else. If you have received this email in error, kindly disregard the 
content of the message and notify the sender immediately. Please be aware that 
all email may be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance with 
relevant legislation."
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver Data Security Checks

[Steve Omondi]

Thanks Andrea for the concise response.

I'll have to reconsider my options.



Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Kind regards,
Steve Omondi

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Steve Omondi 
> wrote:
>
>> *How do I use GWC in front of multiple Geoservers with data security
>> checks (Rules) workin and perform Authorization for the layers being
>> accessed and the seeded tiles? How do I mage Stand alone GWC perform Data
>> Security Check like the Embedded GWC does?*
>>
>>
> To the best of my knowledge, you don't. Security integration happens only
> if you run GWC embedded in GeoServer,
> a stand-alone GWC has no notion of security at all (can be developed of
> course, but does not seem a trivial task).
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Andrea Aime
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 
> 55054  Massarosa
> 
> (LU)
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax: +39 0584 1660272
> mob: +39  339 8844549
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
> nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
> loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
> per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
> messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
> stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
> divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
> utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
> principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
>
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
> addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
> information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
> does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
> completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
> made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
> e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
>
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users

Re: [Geoserver-users] Standalone Geowebcache and Geoserver Data Security Checks

[Andrea Aime]

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Steve Omondi 
wrote:

> *How do I use GWC in front of multiple Geoservers with data security
> checks (Rules) workin and perform Authorization for the layers being
> accessed and the seeded tiles? How do I mage Stand alone GWC perform Data
> Security Check like the Embedded GWC does?*
>
>
To the best of my knowledge, you don't. Security integration happens only
if you run GWC embedded in GeoServer,
a stand-alone GWC has no notion of security at all (can be developed of
course, but does not seem a trivial task).

Cheers
Andrea

==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via di Montramito 3/A
55054  Massarosa (LU)
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.

The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Geoserver-users mailing list

Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this 
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton: 
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines: 
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html

Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users