[OSGeo-Discuss] [Analysis] Geospatial server deployment statistics

[Jonathan Moules]

Hi Jody,
Thanks for the feedback. You're very welcome to cross-post it; the 
blog-content is all CC-BY-SA 4.0 by default so share as you wish.

 > What do other WMS implementations do?

Projection list - I can't comment on how the other software deals with 
this from an administration perspective (I've only ever administered 
GeoServer), but from when I've looked at the GetCaps I don't remember 
seeing long lists, and no server apart from GeoServer ended up 
triggering the " > 5000 projections" score item (itself an arbitrary 
cut-off, didn't test for a low bound).

(One SQL query later...)
Number of projections per dataset below across all server types.

Right column is the number of declared projections (merges the layer and 
nested layer projections), the left column is how many datasets it 
applies to.
Note: If the service declares more than 30 projections GeoSeer culls it 
down to 0.

Count        Num Projections
14            30
200            29
1168        28
1160        27
672            26
3198        25
2037        24
1745        23
5207        22
5175        21
760            20
2348        19
3588        18
4967        17
8254        16
2680        15
14317        14
20274        13
13806        12
17194        11
54545        10
39030        9
43833        8
25608        7
55328        6
50072        5
234676        4
173938        3
149098        2
572727        1
720060        0

I don't imagine there would be big resource savings - it's only around 
120kB uncompressed.

Cheers,
Jonathan

On 2020-06-05 16:30, Jody Garnett wrote:
> That is really interesting Jonathan, if you are open to cross posting 
> it would be nice to reference this from a GeoServer blog post.
>
> I especially liked the fingerprinting:
>
>     A ridiculously long, 5000+ item list of default projections that
>     the server supports that 1 in 6 GeoServer administrators hasn't culled
>
>
> Surprisingly nobody has made a motion to start with a smaller list, 
> and I think we found that if we provided a smaller list folks assume 
> GeoServer is less capable.
> What do other WMS implementations do?
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 11:32, Jonathan Moules 
> <jonathan-lists at lightpear.com <mailto:jonathan-lists at lightpear.com>> 
> wrote:
>
>     Hi All,
>     At the risk of engaging in self-promotion, this may be of interest to
>     the community.
>
>     I've just finished an analysis of what geospatial server software's
>     behind the ~2.2 million WMS/WFS/WCS/WMTS datasets that GeoSeer has in
>     its search-engine index.
>
>     The extremely short version of things likely of interest here:
>
>     * ArcGIS has by far the most deployments: 2,755 (53.70%); other
>     proprietary is a rounding error.
>
>     * GeoServer is the second most popular for deployments (964
>     (18.79%)),
>     and hosts by far the most datasets: 963,603 (43.26%).
>
>     * MapServer has a very healthy deployment count too: 544 (10.6%), and
>     serves a considerable number of datasets: 389,709 (17.49%).
>
>     * Put another way, at least 2/3rds of the world's geospatial data
>     that's
>     served via OGC standards is served by Open Source software (mostly
>     OSGeo). And over 60% between GeoServer and MapServer alone.
>
>     * So basically it looks like many city/county/provincials have an
>     ArcGIS
>     Server install and use that for (occasionally token!) compliance with
>     "open data" edicts, but the full-on SDI data warehouses almost all go
>     for Open Source.
>
>     You can find (much) more detail (+ numbers for a bunch of the other
>     OSGeo projects) in the (ad-free, tracking-free, cookie-free,
>     javascript-free, in fact both free and Free!) blog post:
>     https://www.geoseer.net/blog/?p=2020-06-04_geospatial_server_software
>
>
>     So yes, good job to everyone who contributes in any way to all these
>     projects! Hopefully this reinforces how useful they are; maybe you
>     can
>     use it in future work-bids too (its the sort of thing that reassures
>     management). Could also be be useful when it comes to figuring out
>     where
>     limited OSGeo funds will have most impact.
>
>     Comments/thoughts/discussion/feedback welcome (on or off list).
>     Cheers,
>     Jonathan
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Discuss mailing list
>     Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>     https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20200605/ad9134ff/attachment.html>