...

Testing has been performed on the SBX instance, consisting of an Azure VM for each of the Web and Portal, GIS Server, and Data Store roles. The following tests were performed from Note that SBX is behind a firewall maintained by the cloud team, and our loadtest VM is not whitelisted to access SBX at the time of writting. All tests were performed on the TC network. The results follow:

...

The results show surprisingly good results from the Sandbox machine.  Confirm that the tested URLs existed and didn’t return very fast errors (ESRI gives HTTP 200 codes when it shouldn’t sometimes

It was noticed that SBX VMs were undersized compared to Dev, and that accelerated networking wasn’t enabled. AN is an Azure Feature that was released after Sandbox was created. The VMs were resized and accelerated networking was enabled.

az login

Select-AzSubscription -Subscription 0921cb70-a968-4860-a0dc-7f77ba3a35c4;

az network nic update `
    --name tc-egis-sbx-ds592  `
    --resource-group TC-Sandbox-ArcGIS-RG `
    --accelerated-networking true	
	
az network nic update `
    --name tc-egis-sbx-web95  `
    --resource-group TC-Sandbox-ArcGIS-RG `
    --accelerated-networking true
	
az network nic update `
    --name tc-egis-sbx-gis702   `
    --resource-group TC-Sandbox-ArcGIS-RG `
    --accelerated-networking true	
	
az network nic update `
    --name egis-sbx-geoevt44    `
    --resource-group TC-Sandbox-ArcGIS-RG `
    --accelerated-networking true

The load testing was repeated at the same time of day, although the second round was done through the VPN from a home connection. The results are as follows:

...

These results look around the same despite the improved hardware. No conclusions will be drawn until the test can be repeated again on the TC network.

•  Repeat test in early morning on TC network (not VPN).

Dev

Testing has been performed on the DEV instance, consisting of an Azure VM for each of the Web and Portal, GIS Server, and Data Store roles.

...

The GIS VMs are difference between our Dev and Pilot instances. EGIS-DEV-GIS0 uses a D4S_v3 image that provides a maximum of 6400 IOPS. Pilot uses a DS3_v2 image that provides a maximum of 12800 IOPS. Twice the performance.

Geo Event Server

TODO

OIM Layers

The layers in the Emergency Management Group on the Sandbox instance were sorted by views and the most popular layers were inspected for performance. These layers include

• Flood_Impacts_to_Federal_Property

• IMS_DEV_EVENT_PTS

• Buoys_and_Lights

• TC_Real_Property

• AISTClassA_TC

The first 4 layers are feature layers and the AIS layer is a map service. A number of layers listed in the EMG group were hosted by 3rd parties and were not evaluated.

A low number of users was used to get an idea of base performance per layer, and to see if any particular layers warrant a close look. The results were as follows:

...

A quick look shows that Flood Impacts would be a good first layer to have a look at.

Flood Impacts of Federal Real Property

The layer in question is located here: https://sbxweb.tcgis.ca/portal/home/item.html?id=459b8810542d4cc7a4e24aa65d741f3a

•  Have a look at this layer

Suggestions

• Best practices for publishing and symbolizing data must be followed regardless of our hardware.

  • Create map caches where possible

  • Performance tips for uncached maps

• Re-project all data to WGS84 Web Mercator

  • Avoid all re-projection on the fly

  • Debate?

• Test performance on all layers?

  • Web hooks, test new layers?

...