You can also save your country.o5m files from one use to the next and
then use osmupdate to update them. This way you don't have to download
from Geofabrik and convert from pbf to o5m.
El 07/05/14 11:59, Gerd Petermann escribió:
Hi Felix,
try o5m for both input and output, it is much faster.
The command
osmcovert --drop-version europe-latest.osm.pbf -o=europe.o5m
runs quite fast (~70 seconds on my machine),
the o5m file is ~2.430 MB, the pbf file has 2.104 MB.
Splitter is much faster reading from o5m when
the keep-complete option is in use.
(210 secs for the o5m, 441 for pbf)
With --output=pbf both are slower, and mkgmap is also much slower.
All times with I/O on one normal hard disk. Even better results if you
have
two different disks for reading and writing.
Gerd
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 11:37:58 +0200
From: extremecar...@gmail.com
To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] splitter r325: improved split algo and new
option
Well I still use pbf and not o5m.
First pbf is smaller..
Second - Geofabrik only offers pbf - that's why I stayed with it.
I don't think I can cut a lot of time by first converting to 05m, then
hand it over to splitter...
Actually I also let splitter output pbf... Maybe I could change that
in future to 05m..
On 07.05.2014 11:36, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Felix,
well, nowadays splitter performance mostly depends on I/O if you
use o5m format
for input and output and give enough heap.
Reg. mkgmap performance improvements: yes, that's what I expected.
In short, the branch improved the evaluation of tags and the
creation of the NOD file.
Gerd
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 11:29:10 +0200
From: extremecar...@gmail.com <mailto:extremecar...@gmail.com>
To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] splitter r325: improved split algo and
new option
Well - I'll update all my maps on Thursday again, to recheck.
Maybe it has to do with increasing-maxnodes? Though I thought the
higher the max-nodes, the faster...
And I only meant splitter. I upgraded mkgmap at the same time (now
integrating performance branch changes) - so mkgmap by itself got
faster (though it depends on the country - seems like well mapped
countries profit a lot more (e.g. Austria like 30% time off), than
countries where few continue commands will be in action cause
their mapping is basic like Asia).
I'm not using any pre-split files or cached files of any sort
either...
On 07.05.2014 06:49, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Felix,
reg. speed: I can't reproduce that. I compared a split of
Germany,
both versions (r321 and r325) are more or less running the
same time.
(I've executed both programs two times to make sure that disk
caches
are not causing big differences)
Or did you mean the combination of splitter + mkgmap to
process e.g. Asia?
Gerd
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 18:22:00 +0200
From: extremecar...@gmail.com <mailto:extremecar...@gmail.com>
To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] splitter r325: improved split algo
and new option
Seems to be much better now. I don't think I can increase the
max-nodes value though, but for most maps the new algo creates
less tiles for the same max-nodes value (e.g. Austria from 43
down to 35 for me, with the smallest tile now around 5MB
instead of 2.8, and the biggest 12MB instead of 11MB, for Asia
I simultaneously increased max-nodes from 800k to 900k- so I'm
down from 624 tiles to 493.... and size from 970KB-16MB to now
). So it still seems to depend on the country, but it's
already a lot better...
It's a bit slower (about 10% more time)
On 06.05.2014 13:56, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi all,
I've applied num-tiles-v1.patch and improved the split
algo, see
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/mkgmap-ToDo-list-tp5803388p5805165.html
It is now less likely that splitter creates tiles with a
low number of
nodes, it is more likely that all tiles have nearly the
same number of nodes,
and typically you will see fewer tiles.
Maybe this also means that you can increase the max-nodes
value.
I hope this also reduces the need for complex interactions
between
spltter and mkgmap.
Gerd
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev