21.03.2013 Views

FOSS4G North America Conference 2013 Preliminary Program

FOSS4G North America Conference 2013 Preliminary Program

FOSS4G North America Conference 2013 Preliminary Program

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Spatial Server and Platform<br />

WMS Server Benchmarking for Large Raster Formats<br />

Michael Billmire, Michigan Tech Research Institute and Colin Brooks, Michigan Tech Research<br />

Institute<br />

Prompted by a client's need to serve ~250GB of JPEG2000 imagery, we evaluated several open<br />

source (MapServer, GeoServer) and several proprietary (ERDAS Apollo IWS, ArcGIS Server)<br />

WMS platforms for usability and speed of return of large raster datasets.<br />

The 4 platforms were configured on virtual machines with identical system specifications. Our<br />

test data was a series of 260 Great Lake Shoreline border images that we converted into three<br />

formats for evaluation: a mosaicked TIF, a mosaicked JP2, and platform­specific virtual<br />

mosaics. Following previous <strong>FOSS4G</strong> WMS Benchmarking exercises, HTTP return metrics<br />

were evaluated using Apache JMeter. We evaluated return speed at three zoom levels in order to<br />

account for potential differences in serving highest­resolution vs. overview data.<br />

ArcGIS Server and GeoServer had the fastest return times for the TIF formats, with MapServer<br />

also performing well. ERDAS Apollo had slow return times for TIF format but was extremely fast<br />

with the JP2 format. ERDAS Apollo was also generally the fastest returning the virtual mosaic<br />

format, although ArcGIS Server and MapServer had very comparable results.<br />

Taking both usability and performance into account, it is difficult to identify a clear preference.<br />

ERDAS Apollo excelled in speed tests (aside from TIF format), but had many usability issues.<br />

MapServer and ArcGIS Server were well­rounded in terms of usability and performance.<br />

GeoServer's usability impressed, though the quality of virtual mosaicking was low compared to<br />

the other platforms.<br />

Your Geospatial Platform running on a PaaS<br />

Steven Citron­Pousty, Red Hat<br />

We all know some of the major pieces of a FOSS geospatial platform, some of the main pieces<br />

have been in place for years now. We have all heard about the cloud and how it is going to<br />

"change everything". For most of us, we haven't had a chance to use the cloud and if we have it<br />

is only a Amazon EC2 instance (which is Infrastructure as a Services ­ IaaS). In this talk I will<br />

actually bring up all the infrastructure needed to run GeoServer and PostGIS with two<br />

commands. I am going to give an introduction for a FOSS Platform as a Service (PaaS), explain<br />

why all developers NEED to become familiar with PaaS, and then do a tour­de­force of<br />

geospatial in the cloud: PostGIS, GeoServer, OpenLayers, GeoDjango, and CKAN, without<br />

having to administer any servers.<br />

Removing the middleman: building geospatial applications that can read and write<br />

data to CartoDB without proxy

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!