Hi Lambertus, that's interesting. Are these the img file sizes or the osm file sizes? Gerd Lambertus wrote
Unfortunately I cannot confirm that. Below is a bit of logging from my script: Original: 97000020 (70551453), New: 0 (35684445), New: 1 (36852845) Original: 97000001 (74621042), New: 0 (37522992), New: 1 (37222739) Original: 97000002 (73391358), New: 0 (37679505), New: 1 (38098627) Original: 97000003 (77862567), New: 0 (39075311), New: 1 (39261197)
The original files above contain contour data, the filesize is between brackets. As you can see both resulting file are approximately the same size.
On 2014-04-29 15:39, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Lambertus,
and I guess that even after this optimization you will see a factor 3 or higher between the largest tile and the smallest. Can you confirm that?
Gerd
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 15:32:38 +0200 From:
osm@
To:
mkgmap-dev@.org
Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap ToDo list
Num-tiles=x would indeed be better for this specific need.
It is my experience that it regularly takes multiple calls to Splitter to get 2+ sub-tiles when you reduce the max-nodes by 100k for each sub-split attempt. This is what I currently do to get an optimum in tile-size vs total number of tiles.
On 29/04/2014 15:09, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Lambertus,
that sounds like a possible change in splitter: Instead of specifying max-nodes you may specify --num-tiles=x and splitter will try to find a split that produces excactly x tiles which are not too narrow and have a node number which is not too far from the average (but still aligned to a multiple of map units as now). So, for your script that means you don't have to find the max-nodes value.
I'll think about this again...
Gerd
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:59:36 +0200 From:
osm@
To:
mkgmap-dev@.org
Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap ToDo list
While this possibly can be solved in Splitter or Mkgmap, it could also be solved by your build-script when you add a maximum tile size check and re-split (with a lower number of max-nodes) until you get two or more sub-tiles. Granted, this adds complexity to the script but it works well for me.
On 25/04/2014 21:54, Henning Scholland wrote:
Hi Gerd,
I would like to have img-tiles which have globally nearly the same filesize, so that they use the space of devices like eTrex 10.
With my actual map I use globally the same value for max-nodes. But the size of the img-tiles differ more then factor 2. Eg. a tile in Germany is between 2 and 5 mb where a tile in China is about 10 mb. If I remove details, this difference will increase, because in Germany more objects will be removed from the img-tile then in China.
Henning
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
-- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/mkgmap-ToDo-list-tp5803388p5804588.html Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.