[mkgmap-dev] Small holes in boundary coverageFrom GerdP gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com on Sat Apr 7 17:26:47 BST 2012
Hi WanMil, I've created a new one: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/file/n5624815/identical_output_v2.patch identical_output_v2.patch Gerd WanMil wrote > > Hi Gerd, > > can you please post again the identical output patch? I cannot find it > on my computer and the patch referenced by nabble cannot be found > (http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/2011q4/013223.html). > > Thanks! > WanMil > >> Hi WanMil, >> >> I've tried again. >> Reg. the performance improvements I see only small differences, I guess >> that's because I use >> splitter with default overlap of 2000. I assume the greater the overlap >> the >> greater is the >> improvement of the UnusedElementsRemoverHook ? >> >> reg. different result: >> I've uploaded the tile (sorry, it is very big): >> http://files.mkgmap.org.uk/download/65/63240022.osm.pbf >> I can reproduce the problem with trunk (r2263) (and my >> identical_output.patch) using the following parms: >> java -Xmx1600m -Xms1600m -jar mkgmap.jar --remove-short-arcs --route >> --preserve-element-order 63240022.osm.pbf >> >> If I comment the call of UnusedElementsRemoverHook I get a different >> output >> file. >> I hope you can reproduce it? >> >> Gerd >> >> >> >> WanMil wrote >>> >>>> >>>> Please, can you review if the UnusedElementsRemoverHook is still >>>> useful? >>>> With my test data, it is slowing down mkgmap a little bit and I also >>>> see >>>> a different result for one tile in the UK when I disable it. >>>> >>>> Gerd >>>> >>> >>> Gerd, >>> >>> I cannot reproduce that the UnusedElementsRemoverHook does not improve >>> the speed of mkgmap. Can you please try again? >>> >>> If you see a different result it should be analysed. So please post your >>> tile and your mkgmap parameters and all the details so that I can check >>> that. >>> >>> WanMil >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mkgmap-dev mailing list >>> mkgmap-dev at .org >>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev >>> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Small-holes-in-boundary-coverage-tp5569161p5622393.html >> Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> _______________________________________________ >> mkgmap-dev mailing list >> mkgmap-dev at .org >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev at .org > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Small-holes-in-boundary-coverage-tp5569161p5624815.html Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- Previous message: [mkgmap-dev] Small holes in boundary coverage
- Next message: [mkgmap-dev] Small holes in boundary coverage
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the mkgmap-dev mailing list