[Talk-ca] Slow OSM tiles
Is it just me or is the OSM tile server running really slow? -- Bernie Connors, P.Eng Manager - Spatial Data Infrastructure Land Information Secretariat Service New Brunswick Tel: 506-444-2077 Fax: 506-453-3898 45°56'25.21N, 66°38'53.65W bernie.conn...@snb.camailto:bernie.conn...@snb.ca www.snb.ca/geonb/http://www.snb.ca/geonb/ ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] GeoTiff in JOSM
Two options 1. Covert to tiles with gdal2tiles or another program. How would I then serve these to JOSM? 2. Set up MapServer and server it with WMS 1 is faster at serving tiles but takes more disk space and pre-processing. 2 is slower but better for large files since you don't have to pre-process. As your GeoTiff isn't very large, the first is a viable option. I'd guess it might take me a week to process. Okay, I'll take a look at gdal2tiles; disk space, ram and CPU power are commodities I have available in ample quantity. :) MapServer is a pain to set up, as you've discovered. If you're running Ubuntu I could show you my .map file if it'd help. I'm running a broken Debian unstable distro at the moment. :) I plan to reformat to use UBUNTU in the future so I'll have to look at Mapserver then. Thanks, Tyler ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Slow OSM tiles
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Connors, Bernie (SNB) bernie.conn...@snb.ca wrote: Is it just me or is the OSM tile server running really slow? What are you doing? Just editing? ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Slow OSM tiles
I am not editing. I am just browsing the map to see if my recent edits have been rendered. -- Bernie Connors, P.Eng Service New Brunswick (506) 444-2077 45°56'25.21N, 66°38'53.65W www.snb.ca/geonb/ -Original Message- From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] Sent: Friday, 2011-09-02 11:07 To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Slow OSM tiles On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Connors, Bernie (SNB) bernie.conn...@snb.ca wrote: Is it just me or is the OSM tile server running really slow? What are you doing? Just editing? ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Slow OSM tiles
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Connors, Bernie (SNB) bernie.conn...@snb.ca wrote: I am not editing. I am just browsing the map to see if my recent edits have been rendered. You might have just asked for tiles when the server was particularly busy. That happens often. There was a small change yesterday to how tiles are served. You can see the result at around 1800h yesterday. http://munin.openstreetmap.org/openstreetmap/yevaud.openstreetmap/mod_tile_response.html Normal editing should be unaffected and this greatly reduces the resource drain by bulk tile downloaders. Those who make the greatest demands on the tile server have their rate reduced for a period of time. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] GeoTiff in JOSM
I'm at work and going on vacation so I can't give a detailed answer for a few days, but this might help Once the tiles are made you can serve the directories with apache or another web server. xjjk from the OSM IRC channel has a parallized version of gdal2tiles which can significantly help processing times if you have a multi-core CPU. You first need to set up gdal and gdal python bindings. You also need PIL for the antialias mode which offers the best tradeoffs between quality and speed for resizing methods. gdal2tiles is reportedly significantly slower then it could be when compaired to some non-public tools that do the same work. Just for reference, I had gdal2tiles running for 1-2 weeks on my 6 core CPU when doing the low quality surrey images and estimated it would take 1 year on my 3 core athelon II for the 200 GB+ high quality version On Sep 02, 2011, at 06:51 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: Two options 1. Covert to tiles with gdal2tiles or another program. How would I then serve these to JOSM? 2. Set up MapServer and server it with WMS 1 is faster at serving tiles but takes more disk space and pre-processing. 2 is slower but better for large files since you don't have to pre-process ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Your new coastline
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:15 PM, James A. Treacy tre...@debian.org wrote: On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 10:30:34PM -0400, Andrew MacKinnon wrote: Given that this sort of work is time consuming it will take a while to finish. However, 99% of the work that requires importing coastlines from CanVec is done, and realigning coastlines using Bing is a lot less disruptive and less error-prone. I'm curious why you would trust the Bing imagery more than canvec. In addition to not being very high resolution, I would think that Bing would suffer from problems with registration (alignment of images to lat/lon) which would have to be checked against ground readings. Of course canvec should also be checked for accuracy with local readings. Further, my understanding is that much of the canvec data is generated from local surveying, which uses high end GPS which are extremely accurate. Locally (Kitchener-Waterloo) I have found that the canvec data is very accurate and most imagery less so. I have been using the Bing imagery where high resolution imagery is available and Canvec where high resolution Bing imagery is not available. My impression is that for coastlines, tracing from Bing imagery is more accurate than the Canvec data. Keep in mind that some of the Canvec data is VERY out of date. While the road data in Canvec is fairly up to date, the rest of the Canvec data seems to be old (1990s, 1980s even?) Canvec data shows woods, buildings etc. which clearly haven't existed for many years, for example it often shows forests in areas where new subdivisions have been built recently, old industrial buildings which were torn down 10 years ago and replaced with housing, long-ago abandoned rail spurs to industrial areas and long-demolished agricultural buildings. I would not trust anything except the roads layer in Canvec to be up to date. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Your new coastline
I wish they'd updated the Bing high resolution images In Orangeville there's a new mall, but only one image (of three tiles) has the new mall, the other has the cleared field from when they started. I can only put in half the buildings. Any ideas on how often they update the high res? On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Andrew MacKinnon andrew...@gmail.comwrote: On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:15 PM, James A. Treacy tre...@debian.org wrote: On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 10:30:34PM -0400, Andrew MacKinnon wrote: Given that this sort of work is time consuming it will take a while to finish. However, 99% of the work that requires importing coastlines from CanVec is done, and realigning coastlines using Bing is a lot less disruptive and less error-prone. I'm curious why you would trust the Bing imagery more than canvec. In addition to not being very high resolution, I would think that Bing would suffer from problems with registration (alignment of images to lat/lon) which would have to be checked against ground readings. Of course canvec should also be checked for accuracy with local readings. Further, my understanding is that much of the canvec data is generated from local surveying, which uses high end GPS which are extremely accurate. Locally (Kitchener-Waterloo) I have found that the canvec data is very accurate and most imagery less so. I have been using the Bing imagery where high resolution imagery is available and Canvec where high resolution Bing imagery is not available. My impression is that for coastlines, tracing from Bing imagery is more accurate than the Canvec data. Keep in mind that some of the Canvec data is VERY out of date. While the road data in Canvec is fairly up to date, the rest of the Canvec data seems to be old (1990s, 1980s even?) Canvec data shows woods, buildings etc. which clearly haven't existed for many years, for example it often shows forests in areas where new subdivisions have been built recently, old industrial buildings which were torn down 10 years ago and replaced with housing, long-ago abandoned rail spurs to industrial areas and long-demolished agricultural buildings. I would not trust anything except the roads layer in Canvec to be up to date. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Your new coastline
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 4:34 PM, G. Michael Carter mi...@carterfamily.ca wrote: I wish they'd updated the Bing high resolution images In Orangeville there's a new mall, but only one image (of three tiles) has the new mall, the other has the cleared field from when they started. I can only put in half the buildings. Any ideas on how often they update the high res? SteveC asked for suggestions for bing imagery updates, without being able to promise anything, in June. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2011-June/058862.html I guess that half of Orangeville made it onto the list. :-) It is important to remember that every source we use for OSM lies to us in one way or another. We've each been misled at one point or another by our own GPX tracks, old / mis-aligned / unresolvable aerial imagery, our imperfect memories and illegible hand writing, outdated, mis-aligned or just dead wrong vectors from other sources. So we don't always get things right the first time, or when we think we are improving the work of another mapper. That's okay. We can fix it. That's part of what we're all about. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Your new coastline
A man with one watch will always know the time. A man with two watches will always be in doubt. --Unknown Adam On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 4:34 PM, G. Michael Carter mi...@carterfamily.ca wrote: I wish they'd updated the Bing high resolution images In Orangeville there's a new mall, but only one image (of three tiles) has the new mall, the other has the cleared field from when they started. I can only put in half the buildings. Any ideas on how often they update the high res? SteveC asked for suggestions for bing imagery updates, without being able to promise anything, in June. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2011-June/058862.html I guess that half of Orangeville made it onto the list. :-) It is important to remember that every source we use for OSM lies to us in one way or another. We've each been misled at one point or another by our own GPX tracks, old / mis-aligned / unresolvable aerial imagery, our imperfect memories and illegible hand writing, outdated, mis-aligned or just dead wrong vectors from other sources. So we don't always get things right the first time, or when we think we are improving the work of another mapper. That's okay. We can fix it. That's part of what we're all about. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
