Am Mittwoch 11 Mai 2005 09:18 schrieb Martin Spott: > Dave Culp wrote: > I don't believe that cutting holes into the scenery at runtime meets > the performance expectations of FlightGear users. Therefore we already > have an airport database where everyone can submit their favourite > airport definitions they make with TaxiDraw. > > On the other hand I'd be willing to maintain a PostGIS database where > we could store hand-tuned scenery shapes that don't fall into the > regime of TaxiDraw. Maybe this could somehow be coupled with the > FlightGear Scenery Designer for input if someone adds the required bits > to let TerraGear read the output. > > Unfortunately we can't store elevations in such a database but Norman > promised to be he would give us an update as soon as progress is made > in this area ;-);-)
Well I would say that rather the half of all have a more or less high-end machine avaible. And those whoose machine isn't able to render the scene properly arent forced to use this feature at all. If they don't load a custom mesh-file, they never will have to deal with that. But were you are right is the fact of recompiling the whole at runtime. (even for the more faster machines.) Probably a good idea would be to compile your own Mesh as a btg-file for example or something other equal. So that you already have calculated the vectors of the border. If you keep them quite straight you shouldn't feel such a great perfomance loss - This all just happens when intializing the object - Not every frame. The idea with a PostGIS Database is a quite good idea indeed. would be cool in addition to the real custom objects ;) But this data also needs to get involved into the FlightGear Scenery - Not just to every local one compiling at your own. Greetings, Karsten _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
