Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
33 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Régis Haubourg
Hi PSC ,

Yes we are aware of the MS perf platform since the 2016 QGIS server code sprint.

We have been discussing quite a few times about coding with performance and waited for some investment from C2C during 2017. We are very happy they now publish a daily report, however publishing static tests on static datasets is not what we seek. Yves showed some results in the QGIS Fr user days two years back, and I saw the expectations, frustrations and debates it rose that time. 
Our goal is NOT to compare QGIS server with Mapserver or GeoServer. We don't want to fall into these of debates that in my opinion are dangerous for everyone because it's almost impossible to reach absolute measuring for tools that runs in different environnement and render data differenly.

We are talking of a semi scientific approach here, and being able to reproduce and confirm issues with different tools is probably a very good thing, if we just can take time to analyse things.

Our task was to build a very light platform dedicated to be integrated in continuous integration, and that is really easy to enrich with new tests.  So we build a comparison between framework between ltr, release and dev version that can be run in many contexts (web server type, mutlithread, multiprocess options, rendering options, data providers, etc..).

We also want to keep an history of the developpement version performance for each test.

As you see, this can lead to massive amount of computing and logs, so we really need something easy to set up and as light as possible. Moreover, measuring performance needs light tools to avoid influencing the measure themselves. 

We believe that QGIS renders data extremely fast, but it has some glitches due to the desktop design oringin that can be tackled if we have permanent feedback. 

Paul just finished the platform this week, and we now dedicating efforts on running it on a dedicated server to be certain of not being influenced by any external load.

I hope next week we'll publish it with the first reports.

In the end, the question of hosting the platform on dedicated server still remains, as much as administrating it correctly so that no tool run in parallel at the same time, with the risk of altering the measures.  I hope you are still ok with the fact that we need this kind of tool.

Best regards,
Régis

2018-06-09 15:10 GMT+02:00 Richard 🌍 Duivenvoorde <[hidden email]>:
Hi PSC,

On my TODO list there was to ask Yves/Camptocamp about their QGISserver
tests and make sure Oslandia was eventually aware of that.

See below:

- results are available
https://gmf-test.sig.cloud.camptocamp.net/ms_perfs/
and apparenlty updated daily?
Yves promises to do some cleanup and upload to test.qgis.org

- he thinks Oslandia is aware of this work (to be sure, I bcc Regis :-)

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:        Re: Performance tests QGIS Server
Date:   Wed, 6 Jun 2018 10:30:39 +0200

Le 04/06/2018 à 20:44, Richard 🌍 Duivenvoorde a écrit :
> Hi Yves,
>
> During PSC meeting we were talking about some QGIS-Server OWS
> performance-tests/service that Oslandia is doing currently.
I heard something about this indeed.
> Andreas mentioned that CampToCamp also did something (for Andreas) last
> year. And that you asked me to put it on the website.
> So Question: did you ask me? And did I answer? :-)
Camptocamp did it something and we discussed about how to improve it and
share to the community. The topic was "QGIS benchmark" (07/11/2017). See
https://gmf-test.sig.cloud.camptocamp.net/ms_perfs/. Here a quote of
your answer:

"""
What is the idea? That we (as qgis.org <http://qgis.org>) ourselves run
the benchmark
(docker?) every now and then?

If NOT, then it is easiest when I give you credentials on the
test.qgis.org <http://test.qgis.org> (virtual)Webserver, so you can
rsync/scp the result to a
directory 'benchmarks' at:

http://test.qgis.org/

As you can see Paul (of Oslandia) also pushes the QGISServer CITE test
results there into a directory 'ogc_cite':

http://http://test.qgis.org/ogc_cite/ <http://test.qgis.org/ogc_cite/>

The idea is to either add an index.html to test.qgis.org
<http://test.qgis.org> which then
sents you to individual test directories (or the latest in that
directory), OR we create a (translatable) page in the qgis.org
<http://qgis.org> website
which does some description of the different tests, and then links to
the html-output pages on test.qgis.org <http://test.qgis.org>
I think there should really be some explanation at the performance tests...

Both is possible, just need some body/time to do it :-)
"""
I am ok with a rsync on the QGIS server. Result need some love to
improve some graphics (null value gives no graph at all).

And I should add picture of layer to illustrate the layer complexity.

> Andreas was also wondering in how much of the Oslandia work is actually
> already done by C2C and if it is still handy to communicatie about this.
I don't know, I have no idea what Oslandia is working on, well not more
than what they shared on QGIS mailing list. They are aware of our
project for sure, as we discussed about this at the QGIS server hackfest
and 3Liz pushed a pull request.

Y.



_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Nyall Dawson
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 at 01:07, Régis Haubourg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I hope next week we'll publish it with the first reports.
>

Hey Régis,

I'm keen to hear if you see any significant changes as a result of
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/commit/ce74d57b2 . This commit should fix
a major speed regression with postgres on 3.0.

Nyall
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Régis Haubourg
Hi Nyall, 
Copied 

Le dim. 17 juin 2018 03:25, Nyall Dawson <[hidden email]> a écrit :
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 at 01:07, Régis Haubourg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I hope next week we'll publish it with the first reports.
>

Hey Régis,

I'm keen to hear if you see any significant changes as a result of
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/commit/ce74d57b2 . This commit should fix
a major speed regression with postgres on 3.0.

Nyall

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Régis Haubourg
Woops, sent to early. Never answer a message on a wet touch screen :-D.
I copied Paul so that he can check changes. The platform is ready to be launched here we'll send you a mail during the week. 
Have a good weekend
Regis

Le dim. 17 juin 2018 09:56, Régis Haubourg <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Hi Nyall, 
Copied 

Le dim. 17 juin 2018 03:25, Nyall Dawson <[hidden email]> a écrit :
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 at 01:07, Régis Haubourg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I hope next week we'll publish it with the first reports.
>

Hey Régis,

I'm keen to hear if you see any significant changes as a result of
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/commit/ce74d57b2 . This commit should fix
a major speed regression with postgres on 3.0.

Nyall

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

paul.blottiere
In reply to this post by Régis Haubourg

Dear PSC,


As explained previously by Régis, we spent some time working on a dedicated platform to benchmark performance between several QGIS Server versions (currently 2.14, 2.18, 3.0 and master) and it's time to release it now.

Many users are asking for information about performance differences between QGIS Server 2.X and 3.X. However, they often want to test performance with their own dataset, and not only with some generic stuff. And, in this particular case, we realized that there weren't any simple and convenient way to concretely measure and generate a performance report. For the purpose of meeting the specific needs of these requests, we worked on two dedicated projects: Graffiti [1] and QGIS-Server-Perfsuite [2].


Graffiti

Graffiti is a simple Python tool allowing to generate a HTML report from a tests scenario described in a YAML file. This way, anyone with available QGIS Server instances may use this tool to generate a performance report with custom data, custom .qgs project and custom WMS parameters. This tool meets the initial demands.


QGIS Server Perfsuite

We need such reports to be generated on a daily basis so that we can track regressions or improvements. QGIS Server Perfsuite allows to easily deploy a whole platform with Dockerfile to build/execute QGIS Server, some Ansible scripts for a remote deployment and default configuration files for Graffiti. The result is the report previously mentioned [0].


First results

Regarding these preliminary results, we don't have very good results for lines and polygons in 3.X, but all this requires more investigations because internal test for one customer sometimes shows different tendencies. We already tackled one performance issue with line parallel labelling. QGIS 2.18 and PAL candidates were not taken into account anymore. Once located and the bugfix merged in master, performances are good again, and this scenario is clearly visible in the report [3].

All this to say that performance regressions can happen suddenly, and developing without keeping an eye on performances may be dangerous, especially from a server point of view. The PerfSuite contains only a few scenarios and datasets, and we aim at adding new ones progressively. Of course, we have to be realistic and keep in mind that, regarding the number of options in QGIS, server tuning and data providers, we cannot test everything...


How does this platform plays with MSPerf from C2C ?

It should be made clear that the C2C performance platform does not have the same purpose that what we're are working on. It's not better, it's not worse, it's just a different tool. Firstly, in our case, we don't want to compare QGIS Server with other map servers. The underlying aim is clearly to provide a convenient tool for developers and users to measure the response time of the server on specific data with a particular configuration (by the way, it seems that Docker images of QGIS are private in C2C, which make their facility a tiny difficult to customize without asking them [5]). Secondly, graffiti measures the unitary response time per request, not according to a number of users. Once again, it's a very good thing to have to contemplate the big picture! However, at this stage, it seems more suitable to check the unit rendering time, without messing with web server configurations. Moreover, it allows us to observe the caching time (like with the trust option [6]).


The last step from a system point of view, is to run these tests in a continuous integration environment. Is the PSC interested in helping us in that direction?

Of course, we look forward to hearing the comments and criticisms :).


Sorry for being so long, and have a good day!


All the best.

Paul / the Oslandia Team


[0] http://37.187.164.233/qgis-server-perfsuite-report/graffiti/report.html

[1] https://github.com/pblottiere/graffiti

[2] https://github.com/Oslandia/QGIS-Server-PerfSuite

[3] http://37.187.164.233/qgis-server-perfsuite-report/graffiti/report.html#a98e80fea3074fe19f037adb8e86d35c

[4] https://github.com/KDAB/hotspot

[5] https://github.com/camptocamp/ms_perfs/pull/27

[6] http://37.187.164.233/qgis-server-perfsuite-report/graffiti/report.html#0e8047f450854e73a08851336b21a1d7




On 09/06/18 16:07, Régis Haubourg wrote:
Hi PSC ,

Yes we are aware of the MS perf platform since the 2016 QGIS server code sprint.

We have been discussing quite a few times about coding with performance and waited for some investment from C2C during 2017. We are very happy they now publish a daily report, however publishing static tests on static datasets is not what we seek. Yves showed some results in the QGIS Fr user days two years back, and I saw the expectations, frustrations and debates it rose that time. 
Our goal is NOT to compare QGIS server with Mapserver or GeoServer. We don't want to fall into these of debates that in my opinion are dangerous for everyone because it's almost impossible to reach absolute measuring for tools that runs in different environnement and render data differenly.

We are talking of a semi scientific approach here, and being able to reproduce and confirm issues with different tools is probably a very good thing, if we just can take time to analyse things.

Our task was to build a very light platform dedicated to be integrated in continuous integration, and that is really easy to enrich with new tests.  So we build a comparison between framework between ltr, release and dev version that can be run in many contexts (web server type, mutlithread, multiprocess options, rendering options, data providers, etc..).

We also want to keep an history of the developpement version performance for each test.

As you see, this can lead to massive amount of computing and logs, so we really need something easy to set up and as light as possible. Moreover, measuring performance needs light tools to avoid influencing the measure themselves. 

We believe that QGIS renders data extremely fast, but it has some glitches due to the desktop design oringin that can be tackled if we have permanent feedback. 

Paul just finished the platform this week, and we now dedicating efforts on running it on a dedicated server to be certain of not being influenced by any external load.

I hope next week we'll publish it with the first reports.

In the end, the question of hosting the platform on dedicated server still remains, as much as administrating it correctly so that no tool run in parallel at the same time, with the risk of altering the measures.  I hope you are still ok with the fact that we need this kind of tool.

Best regards,
Régis

2018-06-09 15:10 GMT+02:00 Richard 🌍 Duivenvoorde <[hidden email]>:
Hi PSC,

On my TODO list there was to ask Yves/Camptocamp about their QGISserver
tests and make sure Oslandia was eventually aware of that.

See below:

- results are available
https://gmf-test.sig.cloud.camptocamp.net/ms_perfs/
and apparenlty updated daily?
Yves promises to do some cleanup and upload to test.qgis.org

- he thinks Oslandia is aware of this work (to be sure, I bcc Regis :-)

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:        Re: Performance tests QGIS Server
Date:   Wed, 6 Jun 2018 10:30:39 +0200

Le 04/06/2018 à 20:44, Richard 🌍 Duivenvoorde a écrit :
> Hi Yves,
>
> During PSC meeting we were talking about some QGIS-Server OWS
> performance-tests/service that Oslandia is doing currently.
I heard something about this indeed.
> Andreas mentioned that CampToCamp also did something (for Andreas) last
> year. And that you asked me to put it on the website.
> So Question: did you ask me? And did I answer? :-)
Camptocamp did it something and we discussed about how to improve it and
share to the community. The topic was "QGIS benchmark" (07/11/2017). See
https://gmf-test.sig.cloud.camptocamp.net/ms_perfs/. Here a quote of
your answer:

"""
What is the idea? That we (as qgis.org <http://qgis.org>) ourselves run
the benchmark
(docker?) every now and then?

If NOT, then it is easiest when I give you credentials on the
test.qgis.org <http://test.qgis.org> (virtual)Webserver, so you can
rsync/scp the result to a
directory 'benchmarks' at:

http://test.qgis.org/

As you can see Paul (of Oslandia) also pushes the QGISServer CITE test
results there into a directory 'ogc_cite':

<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://">http://http://test.qgis.org/ogc_cite/ <http://test.qgis.org/ogc_cite/>

The idea is to either add an index.html to test.qgis.org
<http://test.qgis.org> which then
sents you to individual test directories (or the latest in that
directory), OR we create a (translatable) page in the qgis.org
<http://qgis.org> website
which does some description of the different tests, and then links to
the html-output pages on test.qgis.org <http://test.qgis.org>
I think there should really be some explanation at the performance tests...

Both is possible, just need some body/time to do it :-)
"""
I am ok with a rsync on the QGIS server. Result need some love to
improve some graphics (null value gives no graph at all).

And I should add picture of layer to illustrate the layer complexity.

> Andreas was also wondering in how much of the Oslandia work is actually
> already done by C2C and if it is still handy to communicatie about this.
I don't know, I have no idea what Oslandia is working on, well not more
than what they shared on QGIS mailing list. They are aware of our
project for sure, as we discussed about this at the QGIS server hackfest
and 3Liz pushed a pull request.

Y.




_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc


_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

paul.blottiere
In reply to this post by Nyall Dawson
Hi Nyall,


> I'm keen to hear if you see any significant changes as a result of
> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/commit/ce74d57b2 . This commit should fix
> a major speed regression with postgres on 3.0.

The last time I generated the report, I don't think your fix was merged
already. I take a look to generate a new report with the current master,
and let's see what happens :).


All the best.

Paul



On 17/06/18 02:25, Nyall Dawson wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 at 01:07, Régis Haubourg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I hope next week we'll publish it with the first reports.
>>
> Hey Régis,
>
> I'm keen to hear if you see any significant changes as a result of
> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/commit/ce74d57b2 . This commit should fix
> a major speed regression with postgres on 3.0.
>
> Nyall
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

pcav
In reply to this post by paul.blottiere
Hi Paul,
thanks for the detailed report. As results stabilize, I suggest to
publish a blog post on this, to attract more attention, and potentially
resources, to this important theme.

Il 18/06/2018 10:22, Paul Blottiere ha scritto:

> The last step from a system point of view, is to run these tests in a
> continuous integration environment. Is the PSC interested in helping us
> in that direction?
Yes. How do you think PSC can help?

All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

paul.blottiere

Hi Paolo,

The last step from a system point of view, is to run these tests in a
continuous integration environment. Is the PSC interested in helping us
in that direction?
Yes. How do you think PSC can help?

As previously discussed [0], a dedicated server seems necessary to run these kind of tests daily and push the resulting reports on test.qgis.org. Initially, we (Oslandia) proposed 2 solutions:

  • Directly fund that on behalf of QGIS.org
  • Oslandia funds that directly and we deal the equivalent sponsorship level

I think that the trend was towards the first solution, but we wanted to make sure of that. Is it still on the table?

If so, the platform allowing to generate OGC reports for WMS certification and the C2C MSPerf platform should probably be migrated to this server too. BTW, considering that performances tests have to be run without external interference, a server administrator should be named to keep a close watch on the configuration.


With regards.

Paul


[0] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2018-May/006165.html



On 18/06/18 13:27, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
Hi Paul,
thanks for the detailed report. As results stabilize, I suggest to
publish a blog post on this, to attract more attention, and potentially
resources, to this important theme.

Il 18/06/2018 10:22, Paul Blottiere ha scritto:

The last step from a system point of view, is to run these tests in a
continuous integration environment. Is the PSC interested in helping us
in that direction?
Yes. How do you think PSC can help?

All the best.


_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Andreas Neumann-4

Hi,

Personally, I would prefer, if QGIS.ORG would rent a dedicated server in our Hetzner server infrastructure for this. QGIS.ORG would pay for the server. Oslandia would set up and maintain this server for a time frame agreed on. Perhaps starting with one year and then potentially renew the arrangement if it works well. Part of the arrangement would be some basic documentation on how to install and maintain the system. Should Oslandia loose interest, someone else can take over.

Renting a server on Hetzner would mean that all servers are at the same infrastructure. Also, the server rental is not really expensive for QGIS.ORG, but finding a skilled sysadmin/dev to setup and maintain the system is harder. Also, Richard and Jürgen do a lot of work on the QGIS.ORG infrastructure - and I don't want to shovel even more work on their shoulders - unless they want to do it ;-)

We can then discuss how much work this would mean for Oslandia and what sponsoring level this would equate to.

Would such an arrangement be possible?

Thanks for your replies,

Andreas

On 2018-06-18 18:35, Paul Blottiere wrote:

Hi Paolo,


The last step from a system point of view, is to run these tests in a
continuous integration environment. Is the PSC interested in helping us
in that direction?
Yes. How do you think PSC can help?

As previously discussed [0], a dedicated server seems necessary to run these kind of tests daily and push the resulting reports on test.qgis.org. Initially, we (Oslandia) proposed 2 solutions:

  • Directly fund that on behalf of QGIS.org
  • Oslandia funds that directly and we deal the equivalent sponsorship level

I think that the trend was towards the first solution, but we wanted to make sure of that. Is it still on the table?

If so, the platform allowing to generate OGC reports for WMS certification and the C2C MSPerf platform should probably be migrated to this server too. BTW, considering that performances tests have to be run without external interference, a server administrator should be named to keep a close watch on the configuration.


With regards.

Paul


[0] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2018-May/006165.html



On 18/06/18 13:27, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
Hi Paul,
thanks for the detailed report. As results stabilize, I suggest to
publish a blog post on this, to attract more attention, and potentially
resources, to this important theme.

Il 18/06/2018 10:22, Paul Blottiere ha scritto:

The last step from a system point of view, is to run these tests in a
continuous integration environment. Is the PSC interested in helping us
in that direction?
Yes. How do you think PSC can help?

All the best.


_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc



_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

pcav
Hi all,

Il 19/06/2018 07:46, Andreas Neumann ha scritto:
> Personally, I would prefer, if QGIS.ORG would rent a dedicated server in
> our Hetzner server infrastructure for this. QGIS.ORG would pay for the
> server. Oslandia would set up and maintain this server for a time frame
> agreed on. Perhaps starting with one year and then potentially renew the
> arrangement if it works well. Part of the arrangement would be some
> basic documentation on how to install and maintain the system. Should
> Oslandia loose interest, someone else can take over.

agreed

> Renting a server on Hetzner would mean that all servers are at the same
> infrastructure. Also, the server rental is not really expensive for
> QGIS.ORG, but finding a skilled sysadmin/dev to setup and maintain the
> system is harder. Also, Richard and Jürgen do a lot of work on the
> QGIS.ORG infrastructure - and I don't want to shovel even more work on
> their shoulders - unless they want to do it ;-)
>
> We can then discuss how much work this would mean for Oslandia and what
> sponsoring level this would equate to.
>
> Would such an arrangement be possible?

we have discussed about trading work for sponsorship. IMHO this is a bit
of a grey area, as many of us already do unsexy, unpaid work.
If we want to run this way we should have clear rules putting everybody
on the same plan, and this could be a significant step forward for the
project.
All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Marco Bernasocchi-2
On 19.06.2018 12:38, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
We can then discuss how much work this would mean for Oslandia and what
sponsoring level this would equate to.

Would such an arrangement be possible?
we have discussed about trading work for sponsorship. IMHO this is a bit
of a grey area, as many of us already do unsexy, unpaid work.
Absolutely agree with you here.
If we want to run this way we should have clear rules putting everybody
on the same plan, and this could be a significant step forward for the
project.
Not sure if and how we should do that, for sure it is no something to be taken lightly. Shall we discuss this on the next PSC meeting?

Cheers
Marco
-- 
Marco Bernasocchi

QGIS.org Co-chair
http://berna.io

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

pcav
Il 19/06/2018 13:57, Marco Bernasocchi ha scritto:

> Not sure if and how we should do that, for sure it is no something to be
> taken lightly. Shall we discuss this on the next PSC meeting?

sure
thanks

--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Richard Duivenvoorde
In reply to this post by Régis Haubourg
Hi Yves (cc to PSC),

Ok, thanks!
Yours is availabe now on:

http://tests.qgis.org/perf_test/summary_2018-06-20.html

Would be nice if there was a summary_latest.html pointing to the actual
latest test.

See: http://tests.qgis.org/
and
http://tests.qgis.org/ogc_cite/
I will add test.qgis.org to the https://certificate next round.

Although... tests.qgis.org was a temporary solution, do others think it
earns a subdomain? Or should we point qgis.org/tests to it?

My ideas is that somebody takes the lead on
- writing a page in the QGIS-Website about the purpose of these two
tests (ogc_cite) and (perf_test), and then point to the 'latest' of
both, and to the index of both dirs if people want to see older results.

Volunteers?

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde


On 22-06-18 10:59, Yves Jacolin wrote:

> Richard,
>
> Done, I pushed a result made two days ago. Cron job is weekly (every
> saturday). I will push some report on monday by hand but will push every
> sunday via a cron job.
>
> We can of course run test on another server (QGIS server).
>
> If you think we need to change anything, let me know.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Y.


_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

paul.blottiere
Hello PSC,


I would prefer, if QGIS.ORG would rent a dedicated server in our
Hetzner server infrastructure for this. QGIS.ORG would pay for the server.
Good news, thank you for that! What information do you need to go
further on this?


Also, the server rental is not really expensive for QGIS.ORG, but
finding a skilled sysadmin/dev to setup and maintain the system is
harder. Also, Richard and Jürgen do a lot of work on the QGIS.ORG
infrastructure - and I don't want to shovel even more work on their
shoulders
I'm surely not as experienced as Richard or Jürgen, but I'm highly
motivated to achieve this (if there's no objection of course).   


We can then discuss how much work this would mean for Oslandia and
what sponsoring level this would equate to.
we have discussed about trading work for sponsorship. IMHO this is a bit
of a grey area, as many of us already do unsexy, unpaid work.
It's clearly a very sensitive question.


Yours is availabe now on:

http://tests.qgis.org/perf_test/summary_2018-06-20.html
Nice, thanks Yves! By the way, how do we proceed to sort/present reports
from MS-Perf and reports from QGIS-Server-PerfSuite? Because I think we 
should explain "somewhere" differences between these platforms to avoid
some confusion.
 

Otherwise, to continue in this direction, I'll send a mail to the dev
mailing list in order to get some feedback and opinions.



Regards,

Paul




 

On 22/06/18 12:31, Richard Duivenvoorde wrote:
Hi Yves (cc to PSC),

Ok, thanks!
Yours is availabe now on:

http://tests.qgis.org/perf_test/summary_2018-06-20.html

Would be nice if there was a summary_latest.html pointing to the actual
latest test.

See: http://tests.qgis.org/
and
http://tests.qgis.org/ogc_cite/
I will add test.qgis.org to the https://certificate next round.

Although... tests.qgis.org was a temporary solution, do others think it
earns a subdomain? Or should we point qgis.org/tests to it?

My ideas is that somebody takes the lead on
- writing a page in the QGIS-Website about the purpose of these two
tests (ogc_cite) and (perf_test), and then point to the 'latest' of
both, and to the index of both dirs if people want to see older results.

Volunteers?

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde


On 22-06-18 10:59, Yves Jacolin wrote:
Richard,

Done, I pushed a result made two days ago. Cron job is weekly (every
saturday). I will push some report on monday by hand but will push every
sunday via a cron job.

We can of course run test on another server (QGIS server).

If you think we need to change anything, let me know.

Thanks,

Y.

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc


_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Yves Jacolin

Hi,


Le 22/06/2018 à 14:26, Paul Blottiere a écrit :
Yours is availabe now on:

http://tests.qgis.org/perf_test/summary_2018-06-20.html
Nice, thanks Yves! By the way, how do we proceed to sort/present reports
from MS-Perf and reports from QGIS-Server-PerfSuite? Because I think we 
should explain "somewhere" differences between these platforms to avoid
some confusion.
 

Otherwise, to continue in this direction, I'll send a mail to the dev
mailing list in order to get some feedback and opinions.
Paul, can we have a phonecall next week and work together on a blog post?

Y.
-- 
http://yjacolin.gloobe.org

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc

signature.asc (484 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

paul.blottiere

Hi Yves,


Paul, can we have a phonecall next week and work together on a blog post?


Yes of course, it's a good idea!


Paul





On 22/06/18 13:46, Yves Jacolin wrote:

Hi,


Le 22/06/2018 à 14:26, Paul Blottiere a écrit :
Yours is availabe now on:

http://tests.qgis.org/perf_test/summary_2018-06-20.html
Nice, thanks Yves! By the way, how do we proceed to sort/present reports
from MS-Perf and reports from QGIS-Server-PerfSuite? Because I think we 
should explain "somewhere" differences between these platforms to avoid
some confusion.
 

Otherwise, to continue in this direction, I'll send a mail to the dev
mailing list in order to get some feedback and opinions.
Paul, can we have a phonecall next week and work together on a blog post?

Y.
-- 
http://yjacolin.gloobe.org


_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

paul.blottiere
In reply to this post by Richard Duivenvoorde
Hi Richard,


> My ideas is that somebody takes the lead on
> - writing a page in the QGIS-Website about the purpose of these two
> tests (ogc_cite) and (perf_test), and then point to the 'latest' of
> both, and to the index of both dirs if people want to see older results.
>
> Volunteers?

I can do it during the week.

Thanks Richard.


Regards.

Paul
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

Richard Duivenvoorde
On 06/25/2018 10:02 AM, Paul Blottiere wrote:

> Hi Richard,
>
>
>> My ideas is that somebody takes the lead on
>> - writing a page in the QGIS-Website about the purpose of these two
>> tests (ogc_cite) and (perf_test), and then point to the 'latest' of
>> both, and to the index of both dirs if people want to see older results.
>>
>> Volunteers?
>
> I can do it during the week.

Cool, thanks Paul!

Just ping me when you need something for that.

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

paul.blottiere
In reply to this post by paul.blottiere

Dear PSC,


I would prefer, if QGIS.ORG would rent a dedicated server in our
Hetzner server infrastructure for this. QGIS.ORG would pay for the server.
Good news, thank you for that! What information do you need to go
further on this?


Do you have any news about the server?


Have a good day.

Paul




On 22/06/18 13:26, Paul Blottiere wrote:
Hello PSC,


I would prefer, if QGIS.ORG would rent a dedicated server in our
Hetzner server infrastructure for this. QGIS.ORG would pay for the server.
Good news, thank you for that! What information do you need to go
further on this?


Also, the server rental is not really expensive for QGIS.ORG, but
finding a skilled sysadmin/dev to setup and maintain the system is
harder. Also, Richard and Jürgen do a lot of work on the QGIS.ORG
infrastructure - and I don't want to shovel even more work on their
shoulders
I'm surely not as experienced as Richard or Jürgen, but I'm highly
motivated to achieve this (if there's no objection of course).   


We can then discuss how much work this would mean for Oslandia and
what sponsoring level this would equate to.
we have discussed about trading work for sponsorship. IMHO this is a bit
of a grey area, as many of us already do unsexy, unpaid work.
It's clearly a very sensitive question.


Yours is availabe now on:

http://tests.qgis.org/perf_test/summary_2018-06-20.html
Nice, thanks Yves! By the way, how do we proceed to sort/present reports
from MS-Perf and reports from QGIS-Server-PerfSuite? Because I think we 
should explain "somewhere" differences between these platforms to avoid
some confusion.
 

Otherwise, to continue in this direction, I'll send a mail to the dev
mailing list in order to get some feedback and opinions.



Regards,

Paul




 

On 22/06/18 12:31, Richard Duivenvoorde wrote:
Hi Yves (cc to PSC),

Ok, thanks!
Yours is availabe now on:

http://tests.qgis.org/perf_test/summary_2018-06-20.html

Would be nice if there was a summary_latest.html pointing to the actual
latest test.

See: http://tests.qgis.org/
and
http://tests.qgis.org/ogc_cite/
I will add test.qgis.org to the https://certificate next round.

Although... tests.qgis.org was a temporary solution, do others think it
earns a subdomain? Or should we point qgis.org/tests to it?

My ideas is that somebody takes the lead on
- writing a page in the QGIS-Website about the purpose of these two
tests (ogc_cite) and (perf_test), and then point to the 'latest' of
both, and to the index of both dirs if people want to see older results.

Volunteers?

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde


On 22-06-18 10:59, Yves Jacolin wrote:
Richard,

Done, I pushed a result made two days ago. Cron job is weekly (every
saturday). I will push some report on monday by hand but will push every
sunday via a cron job.

We can of course run test on another server (QGIS server).

If you think we need to change anything, let me know.

Thanks,

Y.
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc



_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc


_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Performance tests QGIS Server

pcav
Il 09/07/2018 09:35, Paul Blottiere ha scritto:

> Dear PSC,
>
>
>>> I would prefer, if QGIS.ORG would rent a dedicated server in our
>>> Hetzner server infrastructure for this. QGIS.ORG would pay for the server.
>> Good news, thank you for that! What information do you need to go
>> further on this?
>
>
> Doyou haveany news about the server?

not really, but I think we can buy it anytime, provided you are ready to
work on it.
Thanks.

--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
12