[mapguide-users] Mapguide 2.0 Beta1 vs 1.2 performance

[Bruno Scott]

here is my test today with GG and AGG 

mg2.0+AGG-fusion 17 sec 
mg2.0+AGG+fusion  30 sec 
mg2.0+GD-fusion 10 sec 
mg2.0+GD+fusion    20 sec 

GD seems faster than AGG 

A little precision, i have a huge screen resolution 1900x1200 
I did my test full screen 

I have also noticed something, the image generated by fusion is a lot larger
than the one without fusion. 
We see it when we pan, the image is about 20% bigger than what we see on the
screen. 
20% bigger in 4 direction make the image about twice big. 
And with a resolution of 1900x1200 this could explain the gap in performance
with or without fusion. 


Bruno


Bruce Dechant wrote:
> 
> The performance difference can be attributed to the fact that this is a
> Beta version being compared to a Release version.
> 
> Some things to consider:
> - 1.2 used the GD renderer, whereas, 2.0 is using the new AGG renderer
> (looks much better)
> - there are several places in the code that have not been optimized yet
> (algorithms, memory usage, thread usage, etc...)
> - Fusion is a brand new feature of the 2.0 release and has not been
> optimized either
> - this is a Beta and doesn't necessarily reflect the final release code.
> :)
> 
> Thanks,
> Bruce
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapguide-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> [mailto:mapguide-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Paul Spencer
> Sent: November 21, 2007 10:04 AM
> To: MapGuide Users Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-users] Mapguide 2.0 Beta1 vs 1.2 performance
> 
> It uses the mapdefinition that is set in the application definition,
> if its a tiled map then it should be tiled in the client, otherwise it
> should be a regular old map draw.
> 
> Has anyone else got feedback on this?  I saw fusion running on a
> laptop yesterday, not tiled, full screen, and it was milliseconds
> (<500ms) to pan/zoom (didn't look at select).
> 
> Paul
> 
> On 21-Nov-07, at 3:22 AM, Zac Spitzer wrote:
> 
>> sounds like fusion ain't hitting the tile cache???
>>
>> On Nov 21, 2007 6:44 PM, Bruno Scott <bscott at geomapgis.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have 2 identical vm-ware with windows 2003 running on the same
>>> machine
>>> I start one of the vm-ware, I do the testing, I stop it and then
>>> start the
>>> other to do the other bench Bench is done on the sheboygan sample
>>> at 1:5000
>>> scale
>>>
>>>        MG 2.0 with fusion              Mg 2.0 without
>>> fusion           Mg 1.2
>>>
>>> pan     29 sec                  12 sec                          2 sec
>>>
>>> select  28 sec                  12 sec                          2 sec
>>>
>>>
>>> I know it's only a beta but why is that slow?
>>>
>>> Bruno Scott
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Mapguide-2.0-Beta1-vs-1.2-performance-tf4848550s16610.html#a13872479
>>> Sent from the MapGuide Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapguide-users mailing list
>>> mapguide-users at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-users
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Zac Spitzer
>> http://zacster.blogspot.com/
>> +61 405 847 168 (aussie moible)
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapguide-users mailing list
>> mapguide-users at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-users
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-users mailing list
> mapguide-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-users
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-users mailing list
> mapguide-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-users
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Mapguide-2.0-Beta1-vs-1.2-performance-tf4848550s16610.html#a13897170
Sent from the MapGuide Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.