Simone Giannecchini ha scritto:
> been there than that :-)
> 
> The algorithm we use is a (super) optimized version of the octtree
> algorithm. Notice this sentence in the documents pointed out in the
> blog post:
> "The quantizer is fairly slow compared to median cut or octree methods".
> NeuQuant gives good quality but if you want to use it in place like we
> do (the guy is doing offline preprocessing) ou'd give up a lot in
> terms of speed.
> 
> I should still have around the speed tests I had made with the various
> algorithms, I could put them somewhere (I have a blog as well! :-) ).
> Anyway, there are others novel algorithms that we could try and
> implement but I wonder if ATM it is worth the effort, I think there
> are many other things that we could optimize with a similar effort.
> Mmmmmmhhh, probably topic for an intern.

I agree that for the use case of online data serving having a slow
encoder is not the best option. Yet, for a tile cached set, provided
you have enough processing power to handle either the pre-seeding
or the on line tile generation, it makes sense to offset lower
performance for good quality, as the cost of producing the
tiles becomes a one time only one.

Cheers
Andrea

-- 
Andrea Aime
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to