[Geomoose-users] Performance File Geodatabase vs Shapefiles

[Brian Fischer]

I have not tried either of these but I don't think they will matter because a FGDB is not truly a database where you make a connection to it.  It is still just file based.

Brian Fischer, CFM
Principal | GIS Project Manager 
Houston Engineering, Inc.
O 763.493.4522 | D 763.493.6664 | M 763.229.2734


-----Original Message-----
From: Eli Adam [mailto:eadam at co.lincoln.or.us] 
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 1:28 PM
To: Brian Fischer
Cc: Ed Boesenberg; geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [Geomoose-users] Performance File Geodatabase vs Shapefiles

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Brian Fischer <bfischer at houstoneng.com> wrote:
> Ed,
>
> 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.
>

I've not used FGDB for a datasoruce.  I think that optimized shapefiles are likely to be the fastest in many cases.  With (at least
other) DBs there are options to make them closer to shapefiles, like fastcgi and PROCESSING "CLOSE_CONNECTION=DEFER"
http://www.mapserver.org/optimization/fastcgi.html?highlight=defer

Have you tried those on FGDB?   (not sure if they work.)

Eli



>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> I would encourage you to file bugs or enhancements suggestions in GDAL 
> or mapserver.  I have been trying to do the same.
> http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/query?status=%21closed&order=id&desc=1&type
> =defect and https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/issues
>
>
>
> Brian Fischer, CFM
>
> Principal | GIS Project Manager
>
> Houston Engineering, Inc.
>
> O 763.493.4522 | D 763.493.6664 | M 763.229.2734
>
>
>
> From: geomoose-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> [mailto:geomoose-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Ed 
> Boesenberg
> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 8:52 AM
> To: geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: [Geomoose-users] Performance File Geodatabase vs Shapefiles
>
>
>
> 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?
>
>
>
> Ed
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geomoose-users mailing list
> Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users
>