Seems best to try a non-debug build... To run in JTS you can use:
time bin/jtsop.sh -a ~/data/wsa.wkt -op OverlayNGRobust.unaryUnion You should run off master for this (or a very recent pull) Actually it's better to use bin/jtsop.sh -time -a ~/data/wsa.wkt -op OverlayNGRobust.unaryUnion That will time only the operation, excluding the I/O. On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 7:30 PM Paul Ramsey <pram...@cleverelephant.ca> wrote: > > > > On Nov 25, 2020, at 6:41 PM, Martin Davis <mtncl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Actually OverlayNGRobust.unaryUnion will compare the current OverlayNG > code to GEOS. However, OverlayNG is likely to be slower, in any case. > > > > So: > > GEOS - 6.1 s > > JTS 14.4 s > > > > That's an impressive difference in favour of GEOS. I wonder why Paul's > timings are so different? > > OMG, I wonder... I have a debug build of GEOS (because, you know, > debugging). Is that it? Otherwise, are both tests (JTS and GEOS side) > running through the OverlayNGRobust? I suppose I should ask: how do I run > the JTS test? Then I can cut out the middleman and run them all myself? > > P > > > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 6:00 PM Daniel Baston <dbas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > After collecting the inputs and writing to WKT: > > > > \copy (select st_astext(st_collect(geom), 18) from wsa_vi) to > ~/data/wsa.wkt; > > > > I'm seeing 6 seconds in GEOS (not including WKT parsing) > > > > bin/perf_unary ~/data/wsa.wkt union > > # Reading geometries from /home/dan/data/wsa.wkt > > # Read 1 geometries. > > # 6,137,885 usec > > > > vs 14s in JTS (including WKT parsing) > > > > time bin/jtsop.sh -a ~/data/wsa.wkt -op Overlay.unaryUnion > > # 14.43s user 0.47s system 202% cpu 7.354 total > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 8:21 PM Paul Ramsey <pram...@cleverelephant.ca> > wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 24, 2020, at 5:01 PM, Regina Obe <l...@pcorp.us> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> All the performance talk is mostly because JTS still runs a lot faster > > > than GEOS > > >> for some bulk processing. My current test is a big union of watershed > > >> boundaries, about 6MB of data, which takes about 20s under GEOS and > > >> about 25% of that under JTS. It's a big gap, and in theory the two > code > > > bases > > >> are pretty aligned right now. Same overlayNG engine, etc. So I figure > > > there > > >> has to be a big implementation ball of performance hiding under the > covers > > >> somewhere. No luck thus far. > > >> > > >> I think we're close, looking forward to release :) > > >> > > >> P > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> geos-devel mailing list > > >> geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > > >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel > > > > > > You have your sample watershed data set. Would like to test it out > myself. > > > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ruvs6gxe3yl93c/wsa_vi.sql.bz2?dl=0 > > > > I union all these. It takes about 20s on my Air. > > > > p > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Regina > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > geos-devel mailing list > > > geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > geos-devel mailing list > > geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel > > _______________________________________________ > > geos-devel mailing list > > geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel > > _______________________________________________ > > geos-devel mailing list > > geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel > > _______________________________________________ > geos-devel mailing list > geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel >
_______________________________________________ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel