RNFdev Web Space and band Width

[Sampson, David]

Dan,

1. I'll chat with Frank about the next step.
2. I will also ask Scott and Frank about mirrior issues and how we can
spread the love.
3. If we are having 300 downloads a month then perhaps there will be
more support out there to mirror and such. At least it is a start. If
the need is bigger then maybe the Telescience approach would work.
4. I'm glad to see thoughts about WMS and WFS. Makes sense realy. This
is something to ask the mapserver folks as I'm sure there is a recipe.
5. About the size of the file.  Maybe we can cut that down a bit. What
if we ditch the geography of it? How much space do we save?... I know it
sounds weird. What I'm thinking is that we create a DBF table that can
be easily linked (one to one) with the RNF file. That way it is a two
step process. First download the RNF. Then download our RNF upgrade and
provide a means to append. Going this route would also benefit in that
if the RNF file changes we can find a way that we can always link our
DBF to it, instead of us needing to maintain the geography. I'm am
thinking of linking to polyID or something like that. And we can start
with a standard test to see if the poly ID's and their roadnames have
changed. Just some version control thoughts.  How does that sound in
principle? This might be similar to building a schema to link two DBF
files? Then we house the schema (or what ever I should be calling it)
and not the raw geography.


I'll keep you posted.

I'm researching how to extract data from PDF a little more. I will maybe
try Toronto GTA area and some other southern ontario spots. I figure
this area is good for testing and building because:
A. Lots of potential users
B. It's probably going to be the biggest sluggish portion.

Sound like a plan?

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Putler [mailto:putler at sauder.ubc.ca] 
Sent: September 22, 2006 10:55
To: can_rnf at geodata.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: RNFdev Web Space and band Width

Hi Dave,

Frank's offer of space and bandwidth seems pretty workable. I'm really
certain that the space is sufficient, but I don't have a good sense as
to whether the bandwidth is in the right ballpark. Assuming that the
full RNF bundle weighs (in shapefile format) about 1.5 GB, this implies
that about 330 people could download the bundle in a month. My guess is
that for most months this would work. However, it assumes people
download it once. When things move to either WMS or WFS, I don't have a
clue about what would happen with bandwidth usage.

Dan

On 22-Sep-06, at 7:37 AM, Sampson, David wrote:

> Dan,
>
> Have you had a chance to review my e-mail concerning web space and 
> bandwith issues?  Any thoughts?
>
>
> Cheers
>