Radim, the round() you added in qgsgdalprovider causes problems for me on VC++ ( http://trac.osgeo.org/qgis/browser/trunk/qgis/src/providers/gdal/qgsgdalprovider.cpp#L664 ).
Should we add something like: #define round(dbl) dbl >= 0.0 ? (int)(dbl + 0.5) : ((dbl - (double)(int)dbl) <= -0.5 ? (int)dbl : (int)(dbl - 0.5)) ? 2011/3/10 Radim Blazek <radim.bla...@gmail.com> > I fact, I forgot to write a piece of logic, there is a shift. > > Radim > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Radim Blazek <radim.bla...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I have changed how GDAL provider reads the data, it should be fast again. > > > > > > BUT! I am not absolutely sure that resampling is perfect and the > > nearest neighbour is alway nearest. I dont think however that anybody > > could notice that in normal work. I would appreciate however if > > somebody with fresh brain could check the alignment fiddling. > > > http://trac.osgeo.org/qgis/browser/trunk/qgis/src/providers/gdal/qgsgdalprovider.cpp#L529 > > > > More pointers - more crashes expected! > > > > Radim > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Giovanni Manghi > > <giovanni.man...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 20:17 +0100, Radim Blazek wrote: > >>> Merged to trunk. > >> > >> > >> I'm testing the new raster capabilities of QGIS and I would like to have > >> your opinion on a certain matter before eventually filing a ticket. > >> > >> I have a bunch of big tiff rasters (> 1gb, sometimes > 2gb), with > >> internal tiles and/or overviews. > >> > >> What I'm seeing is that now those rasters take quite a *lot* (making > >> qgis not responsive for a while) to be rendered, before the merge it was > >> all much quicker. > >> > >> As exemple: > >> > >> on QGIS 1.6 a 1.7gb geotiff with tiles and overviews opens in (more or > >> less) 1 sec., in trunk now takes (more os less) 1 minute! > >> > >> > >> After the raster show in the canvas, also opening its properties take a > >> long time. Before the merge was immediate. > >> > >> Zooming and panning it is also much slower than before the merge. > >> > >> Overall it seems like that tiles and overviews are ignored or not read., > >> but to me seems that also opening big tiffs (> 1gb) without internal > >> tiles and/or overviews takes a *lot* more than before the merge. > >> > >> > >> anyone experiencing the same? > >> > >> > >> cheers > >> > >> -- Giovanni -- > >> > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer