<div dir="ltr"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><br><span class="gmail-im"><blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div> * One blocker for WFS was the performance of spatial
filter, in 2.x, they were not forwarded to the database when
possible, and implied reading the whole layer in memory before
doing the spatial query on the QGIS side. Anyone knows if it's
still the case? <br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
No changes here. You just have to specify a QGIS2.ini or QGIS3.ini
to speficy this.<br>René-Luc, <br></div></blockquote><div> </div>I probably missed something. Are you refering to the taking advantage of the setting "Evaluate expressions on QGIS side when possible" ? <br><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br><p>Good points. OGC certification is certainly important and would help
us market QGIS server to potential users. On the other hand - for me
personally - improving performance to bring it at least back to the same
level like version 2 (if not better) is of much higher priority.</p>
<p>Thanks for having a look at how certification may work.</p>
<p>Let's talk about it in Madeira.</p></blockquote><div>Yep, I agree on the priorities too, we are in an estimating stage for Orange. I bet the thread anbout performance can push this one upper on the todo list :) <br></div><div>Let's sprint that in Madeira. <br><br></div><div>Cheers<br></div><div>Régis<br></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2018-02-08 16:07 GMT+01:00 Andreas Neumann <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:a.neumann@carto.net" target="_blank">a.neumann@carto.net</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif">
<p>Hi Régis,</p>
<p>Good points. OGC certification is certainly important and would help us market QGIS server to potential users. On the other hand - for me personally - improving performance to bring it at least back to the same level like version 2 (if not better) is of much higher priority.</p>
<p>Thanks for having a look at how certification may work.</p>
<p>Let's talk about it in Madeira.</p><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<p>Andreas</p></font></span><div><div class="h5">
<p>On 2018-02-08 11:25, Régis Haubourg wrote:</p>
</div></div><blockquote type="cite" style="padding:0 0.4em;border-left:#1010ff 2px solid;margin:0"><div><div class="h5">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi all, <br><br></div>
As you know, QGIS server has been fully refactored for QGIS 3. <br><br></div>
Now some big enterprises are starting to rely on it in production environment and would like to consolidate again QGIS server. <br><br></div>
I have some informations and questions :<br><br><br></div>
# OGC certification<br><br></div>
I got in touch with the OGC certification team, in the aim of getting official certification, since we pass all WMS 1.3.0 tests. <br>If we seek a reference implementation status on behalf of OSGEO and QGIS.org, there should be no fees, that's great news. </div>
The process must be renewed every year. </div>
<div>We started the online testing process here: <a href="http://cite.opengeospatial.org/teamengine" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">http://cite.opengeospatial.<wbr>org/teamengine</a>. It's failing currently, probably because of IP redirections we need to fix in our reference server (the one used by the continuous integration system)</div>
<div> </div>
<div>We are asked to start evaluating WFS conformity too, but that should be a bit painful since there is no API in TeamEngine to make continuous integration, and online platform is not responding. So I'm not confident we'll have quick results here. <br><br></div>
<div>If everything goes well, I think QGIS can be certified soon! I think this will be very interesting to advertise in the doc and website. <br><br></div>
<div>The OGC team seems really happy to see QGIS getting in the certification loop, and suggest we also try to certify QGIS as a client. If anyone has worked in that area, that would be nice to join efforts. </div>
<div> </div>
<div><br># Performance <br><br></div>
<div> * We are still interested in having performance measure reference and ideally have performance driven development with a continuous integration system. Yves, is there anything new on your side? <br><br></div>
<div> * One blocker for WFS was the performance of spatial filter, in 2.x, they were not forwarded to the database when possible, and implied reading the whole layer in memory before doing the spatial query on the QGIS side. Anyone knows if it's still the case? <br><br><br><br></div>
<div>all the best</div>
<div>Régis</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<br>
</div></div><span class=""><div class="m_-640218226194772092pre" style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:monospace">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br> QGIS-Developer mailing list<br> <a href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br> List info: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/qgis-<wbr>developer</a><br> Unsubscribe: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/qgis-<wbr>developer</a></div>
</span></blockquote>
<p><br></p>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>