Ciao John, if you want to get more speed vs more accuracy you can use one of the scale operations.
Check this test to get a feeling about what you can do: http://svn.osgeo.org/geotools/trunk/modules/library/coverage/src/test/java/org/geotools/coverage/processing/ScaleTest.java Simone. ------------------------------------------------------- Ing. Simone Giannecchini GeoSolutions S.A.S. Founder - Software Engineer Via Carignoni 51 55041 Camaiore (LU) Italy phone: +39 0584983027 fax: +39 0584983027 mob: +39 333 8128928 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://geo-solutions.blogspot.com/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/simonegiannecchini http://twitter.com/simogeo ------------------------------------------------------- On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 6:29 PM, john poole <[email protected]> wrote: > Is there a way to call Coverage.resample so that accuracy is > sacrificed for speed? > i.e. can we change the block size from whatever the default is, (9?) to > be something larger? > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > Geotools-gt2-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-gt2-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Geotools-gt2-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-gt2-users
