[Benchmarking] 2013 Shootout?

[Jeff McKenna]

Oliver: I'd agree with you, it would be more of a comparison of features
(MapProxy vs MapCache vs ...).  This could be done as a normal
presentation by a single individual (as opposed to an exercise involving
all teams).

Iván: In the MapServer world we (PSC, community) are heavily using
MapCache, so there would be little interest (none really) to see
MapServer-MapProxy used (don't mean this to be strong, just stating fact).

-jeff



On 2013-04-09 9:35 AM, Oliver Tonnhofer wrote:
> Hi Jeff, hi Iván,
> 
> 
> Tile servers are mostly just serving static files and all implementations should be able to push 1000 tile/s even on a small virtual server. This should be fine for 99.9% of all setups (even OSM peaks below 5000 tile/s). Need more performance? Put a varnish in front of it. Done.
> Things you can't do for WMS. So, that is IMO not really worth benchmarking.
> 
> Comparing other features like merging layers, WMS support, reprojection, performance of the seeding tool, etc. might be more interesting (but even harder to come up with proper benchmarks?!). But then you are comparing features that are not available in all tile engines. 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Oliver
>