[Benchmarking] Testing setup
Smith, Michael ERDC-CRREL-NH
michael.smith at usace.army.mil
Tue Aug 10 09:24:07 EDT 2010
I'd say go with
raster only queries => PNG24
vector only queries => PNG24
mixed queries => JPEG, PNG24, PNG8
EPSG:25831, UTM (original, no reproj for raster)
Lets keep it as simple as possible (but no simpler).
US Army Corps of Engineers
Remote Sensing/GIS Center
On 8/9/10 5:41 AM, "Andrea Aime" <aaime at opengeo.org> wrote:
> Adrian Custer ha scritto:
>> (vector only?) EPSG:22662, Platte-Carré, (no reproj)
>> EPSG:25831, UTM (original, no reproj for raster)
>> EPSG:3857, google (reproj, no datum change)
>> EPSG:23031, UTM/ED50 (reproj, with datum change)
>> Lambert Conformal Conic, 60N,30N; 20East (not mercator)
> thanks for the summary. It all makes sense to me, I just have a couple
> of concerns about the projections.
> One is that they might too many and we should just pick 2, or at
> most 3, to reduce the overall number of tests we're running.
> This is based both on the amount of slides necessary to present and
> discuss the test results, and the amount of time it takes to make
> a full run, which is then to be multiplied by the number of
> participating server (if experience is any indication everybody will
> want to make a run the very last day allowed for testing, something
> which is made likely by the fact we're late with the testing too).
> The other is about the usage of EPSG:22662 as the "non reprojecting"
> one. For the non reprojecting case I'd go for EPSG:4326 directly.
> While I know it's not classically meant to be used for representation,
> it has become common practice (e.g., NASA WMS-es do publish data almost
> exclusively in EPSG:4326) and it guarantees the server is not
> exercising the referencing subsystem at all, making it easier
> to show what the real effect of the referencing subsystem is.
More information about the Benchmarking