perfomance test

[Haris Kurtagic]

Hi,
 
After some discussion's here on this list I got interested in comparing
different data source and fdo providers.
 
So, I have used an test application written as pure FDO client.
I have run test again sdf, shp , 10gr2 and xe, using osgeo sdf, shp and
king.oracle provider.
Data used in test is Sheboygan_Parcels.sdf from MG unittest data.
 
Before I wrote the results I would like to make strong point that this
could be altogether false results, I don't know anything about writing
true fair tests.
As my lawyer told me I should put in here : whatever is written is not
promise, could be wrong and ..... :)
 
17565 features read in case 1,2, 6681 fetaures in 3,4
results are in seconds
 
Test case 1: No geometry filter, Fetch all attributes 
 
SDF        0.937 
SHP        8.531 
10GR2    18.172
XE            18.500
 
Test case 2: No geometry filter, Fetch Geometry and Identity
 
SDF        0.031 
SHP        0.109 
10GR2    1.938
XE           1.735
 
Test Case 3:  Geometry Filter, Fetch all attributes
 
SDF        0.390
SHP        3.391
10GR2     6.906
XE            6.218
 
Test Case 4:  Geometry Filter, Fetch Geometry and Identity
 
SDF        0.031
SHP        0.140
10GR2     0.891
XE           0.797
 
Geometry Filter was: SHPGEOM INTERSECTS GeomFromText('POLYGON ((-87.72
44, -86 44, -86 42, -87.72 42, -87.72 44))')
and for SDF and King.Oracle it returns same number of features 6683
which is good
shape provider returned : 6681 ?
 
Original SDF file was copied to Oracle using that same tool, I call it
Fdo2Sdo.
Oracle 10GR2 is running on my same desktop in virtual machine and XE on
localhost.
 
My Remarks:
SDF is really fast and highly optimized for this kind of queries. Test
Case 4 would be the most used case in real word app. and differences
there are smallest.
I think if you add overhead of MG and other overheads than influence
would be even smaller.
I think these tests are very unfavorable to Oracle.
This test is run with very small data set (just 17565 polygons), I
believe much larger data sets would be more preferable to Oracle.
I also couldn't run test with ordering or grouping (sdf,shp don't
support it). I run this test immediately after installing Oracle, not
using any spatial index optimization
and also provider is not highly optimized as could be.
Here I am comparing file system to database ( it is little unusual ), It
would make more sense to test against other db.
 
I will make this tool freely available very soon, so you will be able to
run test by your self's, and also it would be nice to test other data
sources and providers.
 
I hope that someone will find this tests useful.
I will welcome every comment on this and if I made this tests wrongly
please do tell me.
 
Haris
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapguide-users/attachments/20061029/63193416/attachment.html