[mapserver-users] Mapserver Storage

[Mark Korver]

There are ways to use S3 as the store for source images by using tools
like s3fs (FUSE-based file system backed by Amazon S3) and writing
front end code the intercepts the incoming WMS request, filters using
a grid, then routes to the appropriate EC2 MapServer instance.  This
allows particular instances to do region based caching of source data.
 First request that "hits" a new source file is slow, but second one
is read from EC2's "built-in" storage.  This kind of setup allows you
to run n-number of mapservers all looking at the same data stored on a
S3, but would require some work up front.  The smaller the grid, the
more mapservers. and if you want to scale more you can use LB and
autoscaling.

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 2:41 AM,  <tigana.fluens at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello guys, we're a startup and new to mapserver. We're expecting large
> amounts of data to come by (at least on our scale) around 40-60TB of raster
> images for mapserver to render. My question is for the infrastructure, what
> is the best way to store this (cost-efficiently)?
>
> - Do we just get a dedicated server with a lot of HDDs? I'm looking at a
> 48TB setup in RAID 1+0 so i get 24TB right what happens now if we need more?
> Also, how can we scale from the mapserver side?  Is access to different
> storage servers possible?
> - I've considered SANs but then it's not practical right because only one
> machine will access the storage?
> - What about Amazon's S3? or EBS? Anything we can use on that?
>
> I wish to get awesome advice on this storage issue, basically what the
> considered best practice is for the mapserver people :P Thanks
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-users mailing list
> mapserver-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
>