Publication Date: 2019-02-15
Approval Date: 2018-12-13
Submission Date: 2018-11-28
Reference number of this document: 18-028r2
Reference URL for this document: http://www.opengis.net/doc/PER/t14-D011
Category: Public Engineering Report
Editor: Guy Schumann (RSS)
Title: WMS Quality of Service & Experience
Copyright (c) 2019 Open Geospatial Consortium. To obtain additional rights of use, visit http://www.opengeospatial.org/
This document is not an OGC Standard. This document is an OGC Public Engineering Report created as a deliverable in an OGC Interoperability Initiative and is not an official position of the OGC membership. It is distributed for review and comment. It is subject to change without notice and may not be referred to as an OGC Standard. Further, any OGC Engineering Report should not be referenced as required or mandatory technology in procurements. However, the discussions in this document could very well lead to the definition of an OGC Standard.
Permission is hereby granted by the Open Geospatial Consortium, ("Licensor"), free of charge and subject to the terms set forth below, to any person obtaining a copy of this Intellectual Property and any associated documentation, to deal in the Intellectual Property without restriction (except as set forth below), including without limitation the rights to implement, use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, and/or sublicense copies of the Intellectual Property, and to permit persons to whom the Intellectual Property is furnished to do so, provided that all copyright notices on the intellectual property are retained intact and that each person to whom the Intellectual Property is furnished agrees to the terms of this Agreement.
If you modify the Intellectual Property, all copies of the modified Intellectual Property must include, in addition to the above copyright notice, a notice that the Intellectual Property includes modifications that have not been approved or adopted by LICENSOR.
THIS LICENSE IS A COPYRIGHT LICENSE ONLY, AND DOES NOT CONVEY ANY RIGHTS UNDER ANY PATENTS THAT MAY BE IN FORCE ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NONINFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS. THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR HOLDERS INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE DO NOT WARRANT THAT THE FUNCTIONS CONTAINED IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR THAT THE OPERATION OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE. ANY USE OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SHALL BE MADE ENTIRELY AT THE USER’S OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR ANY CONTRIBUTOR OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS TO THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, OR ANY DIRECT, SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM ANY ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OR ANY LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR UNDER ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION, USE, COMMERCIALIZATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
This license is effective until terminated. You may terminate it at any time by destroying the Intellectual Property together with all copies in any form. The license will also terminate if you fail to comply with any term or condition of this Agreement. Except as provided in the following sentence, no such termination of this license shall require the termination of any third party end-user sublicense to the Intellectual Property which is in force as of the date of notice of such termination. In addition, should the Intellectual Property, or the operation of the Intellectual Property, infringe, or in LICENSOR’s sole opinion be likely to infringe, any patent, copyright, trademark or other right of a third party, you agree that LICENSOR, in its sole discretion, may terminate this license without any compensation or liability to you, your licensees or any other party. You agree upon termination of any kind to destroy or cause to be destroyed the Intellectual Property together with all copies in any form, whether held by you or by any third party.
Except as contained in this notice, the name of LICENSOR or of any other holder of a copyright in all or part of the Intellectual Property shall not be used in advertising or otherwise to promote the sale, use or other dealings in this Intellectual Property without prior written authorization of LICENSOR or such copyright holder. LICENSOR is and shall at all times be the sole entity that may authorize you or any third party to use certification marks, trademarks or other special designations to indicate compliance with any LICENSOR standards or specifications.
This Agreement is governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The application to this Agreement of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is hereby expressly excluded. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed unenforceable, void or invalid, such provision shall be modified so as to make it valid and enforceable, and as so modified the entire Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. No decision, action or inaction by LICENSOR shall be construed to be a waiver of any rights or remedies available to it.
None of the Intellectual Property or underlying information or technology may be downloaded or otherwise exported or reexported in violation of U.S. export laws and regulations. In addition, you are responsible for complying with any local laws in your jurisdiction which may impact your right to import, export or use the Intellectual Property, and you represent that you have complied with any regulations or registration procedures required by applicable law to make this license enforceable.
- 1. Summary
- 1.1. Rationale
- 1.2. Context
- 1.3. Requirements & Research Motivation
- 1.4. What does this ER mean for the QoSE DWG and OGC in general
- 1.5. Prior-After Comparison
- 1.6. Recommendations for Future Work
- 1.7. Document contributor contact points
- 1.8. Foreword
- 2. References
- 3. Terms and definitions
- 4. Overview
- 5. Components and Component Scenario
- 5.1. Component Overview Chart
- 5.2. Quality of Service & Experience (QoSE)
- 5.3. Client with QoSE Support
- 5.4. Test Suite for WMS Service Quality Assessment
- 5.5. WMS Stress Testing with JMeter
- 5.5.1. On stress testing and benchmarking
- 5.5.2. JMeter introduction
- 5.5.3. Simulating concurrent users
- 5.5.4. Separation from the tested infrastructure
- 5.5.5. Impact of Network and other tools
- 5.5.6. Synthetic requests versus real-world requests
- 5.5.7. Randomization of requests parameters
- 5.5.8. Putting together the results
- 5.5.9. JMeter case study example
- 5.5.10. Integration with other QoS tools
- 5.6. GeoServer Extension for QoS
- 5.7. OGC Web Service Landing Pages
- 5.8. TIE and Scenario for Demonstration
- Appendix A: Revision History
Quality of Service (QoS) and Quality of Experience (QoE) as they are intended and described at the OGC are two related concepts which require very specific treatment and characterization. Citing the definitions provided by the Domain Working Group (DWG) charter document:
Quality of Service: Technical reliability and performance of a network service. Typically measured using metrics like error rates, throughput, availability and delay or request response time. This Engineering Report (ER) attempts to handle QoS aspects such as service availability, scalability and speed.
Quality of (User) Experience: A holistic, qualitative measure of the customers' experience of the application or service. It encompasses both the user experience and the customer support experience of the evaluated applications and/or services.
QoE focuses on the usability of the information that is conceived via OGC services to end users or other client application and therefore is concerned more with qualitative aspects of such services like presence of metadata, proper and descriptive namings, appropriate styling and so on (a more thorough treatment is present in the QoE discussion paper OGC 17-049 entitled "Ensuring Quality of User Experience with OGC Web Mapping Services" available at https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=74403&version=1).
QoS focuses on providing reliable (i.e. quantitative ) measures of spatial data service metrics which can be used to characterize how a service ( one or more specific datasets exposed by a certain service) is performing both in near real-time as well as historically. It touches concepts like availability, scalability (also known as capacity), absolute performance (i.e. speed) and can be used to assess also perceived performance by final clients. As mentioned above, it is typically measured using metrics like error rates, throughput, availability and delay or request response time.
Quite often the QoS and QoE aspects of spatial data services are underestimated if not simply ignored due to lack of resources as well as lack of awareness, resulting in services which are difficult to exploit (i.e. QoE very low) and/or unstable or very slow (i.e. QoS very low). The result is that few users end up using them after the initial launch and this is especially true for services targeting end users who are used to interact with services a-la Google Maps which delivers extreme performance and scalability as well as bullet-proof usability.
The ability to combine and visualize location-based data using a Web Map Service (WMS) is a key value proposition of the Federal Geospatial Platform (FGP). The FGP is a collaborative online environment where a collection of the government of Canada’s most relevant geospatial information can be found easily and viewed on maps to support evidence-based decision-making, foster innovation, and provide better service for Canadians. The FGP includes the capability of selecting datasets with WMS to view individually or combined with other services in the FGP viewer.
This functionality, as is the general case with a WMS, is provided to allow users to immediately visualize and analyze geospatial data. Unfortunately, user feedback has proven that these geospatial web services are not always easy or intuitive to navigate, combine or understand. Because the FGP’s primary end users are government policy analysts who are not always highly familiar with mapping and web mapping technologies, it is important to make WMS, and the content they make available, as user-friendly as possible.
In 2016, to help alleviate this issue, the FGP developed a web service quality assessment methodology that supported WMS, ran an assessment and developed recommendations and best practices to support a user-friendly experience for all employees and citizens using WMS. Assessments to date have shown that key considerations are often very simple, but very impactful on QoE. The results of this study were used as the primary input into an OGC Discussion Paper created by the Quality of Service Experience (QoSE) DWG. The OGC QoSE-DWG has developed a discussion paper (OGC 17-049) entitled "Ensuring Quality of User Experience with OGC Web Mapping Services" [https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/17-049] that identifies and describes issues often encountered by users of OGC WMS that affect the quality of their experience, and also provides an assessment framework for identifying issues and measuring quality, along with potential solutions and guidance to improve the usability of services.
The assessment framework for measuring QoE and the associated recommendations for improving service quality are intended to benefit human end-users who need to rapidly assimilate and use web mapping visualizations to answer questions or input into analysis. In other words, they need to be able to make sense of the information an OGC WMS provides them.
In addition, Testbed-13 addressed QoS aspects in the aviation domain. Though specific to a particular domain, The Testbed13: Data Quality Specification Engineering Report [http://docs.opengeospatial.org/per/17-018.html] addressed a number of general aspects that apply to this task nevertheless.
Testbed-14 has addressed the following WMS usability aspects:
1. Develop a revision of the OGC Discussion Paper 17-049: Develop a revision of the OGC Discussion Paper 17-049 as per the review and assessment of the current OGC Discussion Paper 17-049. This revision shall be performed in coordination with OGC QoSE DWG to address potential new requirements such as QoS metadata (Capabilities Extensions) server implementation and monitoring client implementations that allows improved service quality and measurement. The revision is part of this ER.
2. Quality of Service Experience Assessment Framework: The fourteen assessment criteria described in Discussion Paper 17-049 and summarized in Figure 1 are all aimed at assessing the quality of a web service in terms of the degree to which it conveys clearly understood information to the user. The user is assumed to be a non-expert in geospatial web services, but in most cases the criteria are equally valid for all classes of users. A selected number of services in the Testbed will be assessed against the QoSE assessment criteria, and retested once recommendations have been applied. Comparison of results will help to validate the effectiveness of the assessment criteria and the corresponding recommendations to improve usability, and allow for feedback, improvement or correction. Services are provided as Testbed-14 deliverable D115 and, a dedicated client as D116.