On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 09:14, Moritz Lennert <mlenn...@club.worldonline.be> wrote: > > Hi Luca, >
Hi Moritz, > Just two brainstorming ideas: > > - From a rapid glance at the code it seems to me that you create a separate > worker for each row in the raster. Correct ? AFAIR, spawning workers does > create quite a bit of overhead. Depending on the row to column ratio of your > raster, maybe you would be better off sending larger chunks to workers ? > right now I creating a worker for each pixel to be checked against all the other pixels, yes it could be and idea to send larger chunks, I could split the array vertically according to the number of processor > - Depending on the number of parallel jobs, disk access can quickly become > the bottleneck on non parallelized file systems. So it would be interesting > to see if using fewer processes might actually speed up things. Then it is a > question of finding the equilibrium. > ok, this make sense thanks for your support > Moritz > -- ciao Luca www.lucadelu.org _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
