On 4/28/2015 4:35 PM, andrew byrd wrote:
Hello OSM developers,
Over the last few years I have worked on several pieces of software
that consume and produce the PBF format. I have always appreciated the
advantages of PBF over XML for our use cases, but over time it became
apparent to me that PBF is significantly more complex than would be
necessary to meet its objectives of speed and compactness.
Based on my observations about the effectiveness of various techniques
used in PBF and other formats, I devised an alternative OSM
representation that is consistently about 8% smaller than PBF but
substantially simpler to encode and decode. This work is presented in
an article at http://conveyal.com/blog/2015/04/27/osm-formats/. I
welcome any comments you may have on this article or on the potential
for a shift to simpler binary OSM formats.
How does it work with diffs and history files?
PBF comes with relatively common support and libraries with a reasonable
interface for most languages. How is this with your proposed format?
Parse times for an extract with osm2pgsql are 13s for PBF (334 MB) and
18s for o5m (698 MB). I don't have any large o5m files sitting around so
I can't check for a larger extract.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
