[mapserver-users] Projection takes less time than no projection ?

[Clément MONIER]

Yes, you're right ! thanks a lot !
My projection (epsg dat) def file had some errors.
I made some corrections on my proj espg dat files and it works fine with
PROJECTION "init=epsg:3785" END
Everywhere

Response times now make sense : +10% when projection's enabled (on a specific test tile)

De : TC Haddad [mailto:tchaddad at gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 4 décembre 2012 17:29
À : Clément MONIER
Objet : Re: [mapserver-users] Projection takes less time than no projection ?

Strange. Maybe you should check your proj EPSG code list and search for 3785 to see if it is listed there (maybe it is missing for some reason?). Or if it is in there, compare it to the defs below to look for any mistakes....

Tanya
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 7:57 AM, Clément MONIER <Clement.MONIER at v-trafic.com<mailto:Clement.MONIER at v-trafic.com>> wrote:
I did try but it didn't give me the same map view (though requested with TILE=X+Y+Z)
I don't know why, but (only in the new mapfile version) if I don't put a MAP projection block like this

PROJECTION
    "proj=merc"
    "a=6378137"
    "b=6378137"
    "lat_ts=0.0"
    "lon_0=0.0"
    "x_0=0.0"
    "y_0=0"
    "k=1.0"
    "units=m"
    "nadgrids=@null"
    "no_defs"
END

Instead of
PROJECTION "init=epsg:3785" END
I don't get the same map's view

De : TC Haddad [mailto:tchaddad at gmail.com<mailto:tchaddad at gmail.com>]
Envoyé : mardi 4 décembre 2012 16:51
À : Clément MONIER
Objet : Re: [mapserver-users] Projection takes less time than no projection ?

did you try this option for comparison?
MAP
...
PROJECTION "init=epsg:3785" END
...
LAYER
...
PROJECTION "init=epsg:3785" END
...
END
...
END

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Clément MONIER <Clement.MONIER at v-trafic.com<mailto:Clement.MONIER at v-trafic.com>> wrote:
MAP
...
PROJECTION "init=epsg:3785" END
...
LAYER
...
PROJECTION "init=epsg:4326" END
...
END
...
END


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-users/attachments/20121204/a0fcccbe/attachment-0001.html>