Hi Carlos, I assume you meant 4.5 MB. I am not sure about the limits, is it 16MB for a single sub file (RGN, DEM etc) or 16MB for one *.img? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Carlos Dávila <carlos@alternativaslibres.org> Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Januar 2021 15:52 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Tiles pruned in DEM map I have compiled Australia with mkgmap r4600, with dem and without --no-order-by-decreasing-area at the end of command line and all tiles seem to display correctly. Overview size is 4.5 GB. What size is expected to cause trouble? El 24/1/21 a las 8:59, Gerd Petermann escribió:
Hi Ticker,
my concern was not about the number of additional bytes on the disk, but the size limits in IMG format. Anyway, since nobody else commented we probably only find out when someone hits that limit, so I've committed the patch (first v5, than changes from v6, sorry for that) with r4599.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 23. Januar 2021 19:54 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Tiles pruned in DEM map
Hi Gerd
Given that the overview map is for use on computers with 100s of G of disk space and the main map will be a G or so, can an extra few 10K or so in the overview map really be a problem for anyone?
Building British-and-ireland, with default style and just --gmapsupp (ie no index or routing) gmapsupp.img is 542M and osmmap.img is 220k. With --order-by-decreasing-area they increase to 603M (11.3%) and 228k (3.6%).
With routing, indexing, code page 1252 and other typical options, gmapsupp.imp might be double the size and so the percentage increase would be a lot less but not significantly different for osmmap.img.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-01-23 at 11:29 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Ticker,
outch, sorry! It seems I created my patch without any testing :( I'm still not happy with the handling of the --order-by-decreasing -area option. I wonder why nobody else comments on this. Either nobody cares about the size of the overview map or nobody else tried any of the patches. Since this is a major change I hoped for more feedback.
Gerd
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
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev