Hi Felix,

well, nowadays splitter performance mostly depends on I/O if you use o5m format
for input and output and give enough heap.

Reg. mkgmap performance improvements: yes, that's what I expected.
In short, the branch improved the evaluation of tags and the creation of the NOD file.

Gerd

---

Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 11:29:10 +0200
From: extremecarver@gmail.com
To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] splitter r325: improved split algo and new option

Well - I'll update all my maps on Thursday again, to recheck. Maybe it has to do with increasing-maxnodes? Though I thought the higher the max-nodes, the faster...
And I only meant splitter. I upgraded mkgmap at the same time (now integrating performance branch changes) - so mkgmap by itself got faster (though it depends on the country - seems like well mapped countries profit a lot more (e.g. Austria like 30% time off), than countries where few continue commands will be in action cause their mapping is basic like Asia).

I'm not using any pre-split files or cached files of any sort either...

On 07.05.2014 06:49, Gerd Petermann wrote:

Hi Felix,

reg. speed: I can't reproduce that. I compared a split of Germany,
both versions (r321 and r325) are more or less running the same time.
(I've executed both programs two times to make sure that disk caches
are not causing big differences)

Or did you mean the combination of splitter + mkgmap to process e.g. Asia?

Gerd

---

Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 18:22:00 +0200
From: extremecarver@gmail.com
To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] splitter r325: improved split algo and new option

Seems to be much better now. I don't think I can increase the max-nodes value though, but for most maps the new algo creates less tiles for the same max-nodes value (e.g. Austria from 43 down to 35 for me, with the smallest tile now around 5MB instead of 2.8, and the biggest 12MB instead of 11MB, for Asia I simultaneously increased max-nodes from 800k to 900k- so I'm down from 624 tiles to 493.... and size from 970KB-16MB to now ). So it still seems to depend on the country, but it's already a lot better...
It's a bit slower (about 10% more time)

On 06.05.2014 13:56, Gerd Petermann wrote:

Hi all,

I've applied num-tiles-v1.patch  and improved the split algo, see
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/mkgmap-ToDo-list-tp5803388p5805165.html


It is now less likely that splitter creates tiles with a low number of
nodes, it is more likely that all tiles have nearly  the same number of nodes,
and typically you will see fewer tiles.
Maybe this also means that you can increase the max-nodes value.

I hope this also reduces the need for complex interactions between
spltter and mkgmap.



Gerd

_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

-- 
keep on biking and discovering new trails

Felix
openmtbmap.org & www.velomap.org

_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

-- 
keep on biking and discovering new trails

Felix
openmtbmap.org & www.velomap.org

_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

-- 
keep on biking and discovering new trails

Felix
openmtbmap.org & www.velomap.org