New Site Using Remote Cache Hosting Service - ArcGIS Server in The Cloud

Posted At : June 19, 2009 12:58 PM | Posted By : Jason
Related Categories: ArcGIS JS API, ArcGIS Server FLEX, Example Sites, ArcGIS Server

Hey folks...Just wanted to share a site that is now using our remote cache hosting service to serve cached tiles.

I previously showed several Javascript API sites uing this service, but this one is using Flex api for ArcGIS Server.

This really frees up bandwidth to let the dynamic layers be served quickly. Those aerial images can be very bandwidth intensive, so hosting these remotely them makes a lot of sense when bandwidth is limited, or you have a high volume site.

Here is is: Santa Rosa Planning and Zoning Viewer. The layer that is being served remotely is the 'Aerial Photos' layer. If you are a developer geek like me, check out the site with firebug enabled so that you can see the Aerial imagery being served remotely - meaning a different location that the ArcGIS server itself. Cool stuff.

Comments (7) | Print | Send | del.icio.us | Digg It! | Linking Blogs | 1232 Views
Comments (Comment Moderation is enabled. Your comment will not appear until approved.)
[Add Comment] [Subscribe to Comments]
James Fee's Gravatar Did part of the blog post get cut off? I didn't see any ArcGIS Server running in the cloud, just a tile cache. I'm a firm believe in putting tile caches in the cloud, but that is a far cry from running ArcGIS Server in the cloud.
# Posted By James Fee | 6/19/09 3:40 PM
Jason Harris's Gravatar No, my favorite smart ass. It didnt get cut off. Maybe I should have said 'Storage Cloud'. Its amazing though...I have been trying to get an article written about storing your tiles on Amazon for over a year now....And it was pretty much dead in the water(I still dont think anyone at ESRI got the concept)..until the other day when ArcNews called me back saying that "The Cloud' is big on Jacks's radar now, so lets do this story".

But, yeah, as for running AGS on a ec2 instance...I havent done it, nor do I see a need to do it - yet. Its still cost prohibitive to do so. But storing tiles up there make all the sense in the world.
# Posted By Jason Harris | 6/19/09 3:54 PM
James Fee's Gravatar You don't want to scale up 64 ArcGIS Servers? Oh my the costs!

The problem with creating tiles locally and them pushing to the cloud is that it takes forever, we need a way to generate ESRI tile caches on AWS to they can scale and then copy them to S3.
# Posted By James Fee | 6/19/09 4:02 PM
Jason Harris's Gravatar I have thought about that too...but something tells me it will end up being a bigger pita than its worth. I dont know how you get your tiles up to s3, but we have been using bucket explorer. I thought about writing my own little app to do it, but Bucket explorer does a really nice job. You can open up many instances of it and upload to multiple folders at the same time....And it has a hash check if you try to overwrite existing (identical) tiles and will skip over them saving lots of time on subsequent tile updates.
# Posted By Jason Harris | 6/19/09 4:19 PM
aitorcalero's Gravatar Great stuff!!! Thanks for sharing. I would be interested to know what are the costs associatted to the S3 Amazon Storage Service. Do you have to pay for space used, numbers of downloads...?
# Posted By aitorcalero | 6/26/09 9:36 AM
Lakshmanan's Gravatar Great Work . Please write something about cost based comparison on using
Amazon servers.
# Posted By Lakshmanan | 6/27/09 10:32 AM
Jason Harris's Gravatar You basically pay for everything. Upload, download, space used, etc. The good thing is that its unbelievably cheap. The benefit is the huge amount of bandwidth that they can provide. In order to maintain an in house data link of that speed would be many many thousands of dollars per month. So, to me, its an unbeatable solution...it just makes sense. Check out the s3 pricing <a href="http://aws.amazon.com/s3/##pricing">here&l...;
# Posted By Jason Harris | 6/28/09 11:40 AM
[Add Comment]
BlogCFC was created by Raymond Camden. This blog is running version 5.9.1.002. Contact Blog Owner