Hello Felix,
thanks for trying. I think the most interesting part of the fix
is that it allows to split very large files with a higher
max-area value when memory is an issue. As long as only one pass
is needed, the benefits are rather small.
BUT if you can split europe in two or three passes instaead of 5
or more the speed is probably much better.
Anyhow, I am no longer sure about my change reg. the default
value for max-areas. I think the old default 255 was better.
On my linux box with -Xmx3200m I still needed two passes with
max-areas=512 for europe.
ciao,
Gerd
>
> some more speed observations:
> country germany.pbf from Geofabrik
>
> splitter_patched with optimize-mem: 3 min 6 seconds
> splitter_patched without optimize-mem: 3min 2 seconds
> old splitter: 3 min 42 seconds
>
> I am currently running against europe.pbf, will post the
results later.
> But it seems that the patched mkgmap is consistently a
bit faster. I
> think optimize-mem is better of by default though (most
people using
> mkgmap/splitter have powerful computers anyhow).
> I'm interested if the 1024 max areas vs the old 255 and
subsequent less
> runs make for a bigger speedup than on small(er)
extracts.
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
>
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev