<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Ed,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">We have been trying to use FGDB as well, but there is definitely decreased performance compared to shapefiles. Also ran into some file locking problems. I am hoping this will improve because a lot of organizations
are moving towards managing their data in FDGB over shapefile. The other approach I have been thinking about is getting a good translator to easily push a filegeodatabase into PostGIS.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">We have also ran into a few other things like having to use absolute paths in the mapfile, feature classes can’t be over a certain length and can’t seem to access a standalone table using PHP mapscript.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">I would encourage you to file bugs or enhancements suggestions in GDAL or mapserver. I have been trying to do the same.
<a href="http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/query?status=%21closed&order=id&desc=1&type=defect">
http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/query?status=%21closed&order=id&desc=1&type=defect</a> and
<a href="https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/issues">https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/issues</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:black">Brian Fischer, CFM<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D">Principal | GIS Project Manager
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black">Houston Engineering, Inc.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black">O</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black"> 763.493.4522 |
<b>D</b> 763.493.6664 | <b>M</b> 763.229.2734</span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> geomoose-users-bounces@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:geomoose-users-bounces@lists.osgeo.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Ed Boesenberg<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 12, 2012 8:52 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> geomoose-users@lists.osgeo.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Geomoose-users] Performance File Geodatabase vs Shapefiles<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I added a file geodatabase to a new GM 2.6 application and the file geodatabase is slower at loading the features than compared to using shapefiles. My FGDB has two feature datasets (manholes and pipes) with over 2,000 features each.
Is anyone using a file geodatabase to store their data and do you notice any performance decrease when compared to shapefiles?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ed<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>