[mkgmap-dev] Merging back the performance branch

Thu Mar 8 20:58:32 GMT 2012

Hi WanMil,

> Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 21:37:50 +0100
> From: wmgcnfg at web.de
> To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Merging back the performance branch
> 
> I've commited the other changes also.
> I have removed the System.out calls from the LocationHook with a 
> separate logger. There might be some questions why a given street or POI 
> is not assigned to a special city. To answer such questions it is 
> necessary to be enable logging in an mkgmap build.

Okay, I'll look at this tomorrow.

> 
> There are also similar debug System.outs in the BoundaryQuadTree. 
> Although I think they should be replaced with log statements (it's the 
> debugging facility of mkgmap) I have left them there because I think the 
> output is mostly interesting for you.

see above

> 
> Did I miss any patch? I think I have commited all but there were so 
> many... :-)

yes, there was one more :
styledConv_v1.patch was posted 
		2012-03-03 17:35 

Today I have found a good solution to reduce the number of 
tag evaluations by detecting common subexpresesions in rules
and caching the results.
Maybe I can finish that tomorrow.
On my machine, mkgmap is now often waiting for the I/O :-)

Ciao,
Gerd

> 
> WanMil
> 
> > Hi Gerd,
> >
> > regards the findbugs fixes:
> > I have commited the StyleTester change. And I have changed the
> > LocationHook synchronization to use a separate static lock object. Using
> > the boundaryDirName could have the same problem like using BOUNDS_OPTION.
> >
> > I am unsure about the other findbugs changes (GmapsuppBuilder and
> > TypCompiler).
> > They look good to me but Steve should know better if they are a good fix
> > or if they remove a required side effect?!?
> >
> > WanMil
> >
> >> Hi WanMil,
> >>
> >> attached are two patches:
> >> 1) findbugs found several problems in the existing sources.
> >> findbugs.patch contains my suggested solution for three of them,
> >> please review
> >>
> >> 2) performance_cleanup_v1.patch contains
> >> - updated javadoc
> >> - removed dead or commented code
> >> - private constructor for stand-alone BoundaryPreparer to get
> >> rid of new parameters like "preparer-out-dir"
> >> - System.out.println ->  log.*
> >> - moved readArea() to readStreamRawFormat to get closer to the
> >> trunk version
> >> - LocationHook: findbugs doesn't like
> >> synchronized (BOUNDS_OPTION) {...}
> >> because BOUNDS_OPTION is an interned String. The
> >> patch changes that to
> >> synchronized (boundaryDirName){...}
> >> I am not sure if that is better?
> >>
> >> Gerd
> >>
> >>
> >>   >  Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:18:41 +0100
> >>   >  From: wmgcnfg at web.de
> >>   >  To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >>   >  Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Merging back the performance branch
> >>   >
> >>   >  >  Hi WanMil,
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  >  Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 16:28:12 +0100
> >>   >  >  >  From: wmgcnfg at web.de
> >>   >  >  >  To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >>   >  >  >  Subject: [mkgmap-dev] Merging back the performance branch
> >>   >  >  >
> >>   >  >  >  Hi Gerd,
> >>   >  >  >
> >>   >  >  >  in your opinion what is the current status of the performance branch?
> >>   >  >  >  There seem to be no more fundamental changes so I would like to
> >> focus on
> >>   >  >  >  merging it back to the trunk. Additional improvements can then be
> >>   >  >  >  applied to the trunk.
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  well, r2234 doesn't contain all patches that I've posted. Do you
> >> plan to
> >>   >  >  add them?
> >>   >
> >>   >  Of course, but I want to have a look on the patches before commiting
> >> them.
> >>   >
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  My latest version contains another big change regarding Tags and
> >>   >  >  StyledConverter.
> >>   >  >  I'd like to change the Rule evaluation in a way that it will allow to
> >>   >  >  skip many rules
> >>   >  >  that are now partly evaluated.
> >>   >  >  Up to now my changes are saving maybe 5% - 10 %, but I hope to see
> >> more.
> >>   >  >  I don't think that this will be done soon.
> >>   >
> >>   >  We can merge back the performance branch and continue using it for the
> >>   >  style changes.
> >>   >
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  I have an idea how splitArea() could be changed to be much faster, but
> >>   >  >  no algorithm
> >>   >  >  yet. I believe that we don't need any Area.intersect() calculations for
> >>   >  >  that, we
> >>   >  >  just have to split a few lines.
> >>   >
> >>   >  That's great.
> >>   >  Maybe you can invest your time better in other points of mkgmap with a
> >>   >  greater improvement. Performance improvements are great but there are
> >>   >  some functional problems unsolved, e.g. the Subdivision creation in
> >>   >  mkgmap has some problems which need to be addressed.
> >>   >
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  >
> >>   >  >  >  The performance improvements are great. Before merging back I
> >> would like
> >>   >  >  >  to invite people (and give them the chance) to test it carefully. For
> >>   >  >  >  this I will upload the complete world bounds so that anyone can
> >>   >  >  participate.
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  good. I can't believe that so many changes do not contain any bugs:-)
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  >
> >>   >  >  >   From my point of view the following things must be done before
> >> merging
> >>   >  >  >  back:
> >>   >  >  >  * Remove several System.out printouts. Please use the mkgmap internal
> >>   >  >  >  logging system.
> >>   >  >  >  * One note to the logging system: Instead of using
> >>   >  >  >  log.info("There were "+n+" results")
> >>   >  >  >  better use
> >>   >  >  >  log.info("There were", n, "results")
> >>   >  >  >  This avoids string creation in case the log message is not logged.
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  okay, I will change that.
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  >  * Please check the code with FindBugs or something similar
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  okay, I wasn't aware that this tool is for free :-)
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  >  * Is the source code well documented?
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  hard to say. I tend to comment only those lines that implement
> >>   >  >  a tricky solution. Everything else should be self-documenting.
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  >  * Is the licence header added to all classes?
> >>   >  >  What would the right one?
> >>   >
> >>   >  I don't know if there is a 'correct' one but I am using the following:
> >>   >  /*
> >>   >  * Copyright (C) 2006, 2012.
> >>   >  *
> >>   >  * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> >>   >  * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 or
> >>   >  * version 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> >>   >  *
> >>   >  * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> >>   >  * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> >>   >  * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
> >>   >  * General Public License for more details.
> >>   >  */
> >>   >
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  >  * The BoundaryPreparer uses options like "preparer-out-dir". Are
> >> these
> >>   >  >  >  options documented? The name should be more specific (e.g.
> >>   >  >  bounds-out-dir).
> >>   >  >  okay
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  Gerd
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  >
> >>   >  >  >  WanMil
> >>   >  >  >  _______________________________________________
> >>   >  >  >  mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >>   >  >  >  mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >>   >  >  >  http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >
> >>   >  >  _______________________________________________
> >>   >  >  mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >>   >  >  mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >>   >  >  http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >>   >
> >>   >  _______________________________________________
> >>   >  mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >>   >  mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >>   >  http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20120308/96095ab2/attachment.html 