[MapProxy] Suggested cache setup

[Oliver Tonnhofer]

On 26.07.2012, at 22:42, Benjamin Wragg wrote:
> I have another newbie question...sorry...I have to pre cache via seeding a few large areas total 30,000km2, from level 0-16, so that it can be used by some users offline who don't have internet access. From looking over the docs I can see the default way to store the cached images is on the file system. The other two options are mbtiles and couchdb.

You should make a seed with a coverage and with --dry-run, that gives you a rough number of tiles you will have to deal with.

> At what point is it recommended to move to couchdb?
> Is there a point where the filesystem becomes ineffective/slow and its recommended to start using couchdb? i.e is my above implementation of 30,000km2 from level 0-16 going to cope on the file system?
> If you only have 1 mapproxy server accessing the cache and there isn't much speed difference, is there any benefit that comes from moving to couchdb?


The filesystem should be faster than CouchDB, because you have a relatively large overhead with the HTTP protocol between MapProxy and CouchDB. CouchDB is great when you need to have the cache on more than one server, because it has a nice replication feature. You can also create setups where a loadbalancer tries to access the CouchDB directly and only refers to MapProxy when a tile is not available.

In your case, I think the filesystem will be the best choice.

Regards,
Oliver

-- 
Oliver Tonnhofer    | Omniscale GmbH & Co KG    | http://omniscale.de
http://mapproxy.org | https://github.com/olt | @oltonn