Thanks to both, but ...
On Tuesday, April 7, 2015 at 10:10:58 PM UTC+1, Vinny P wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Barry Hunter <[email protected]
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>>
> Copying over the network from that repository, vs copying from dedicated
>> Google Storage, is probably not significantly different
>>
>
> +1
>
I gave it a try, and ...
:-( Google's self-contradictory documentation meant that GCS was a
pain to set up
:-( GCS is about half the speed of using the local FS. See the
table below.
Averaged over five different test paths:
Test Processing Time Travel Time Total Time
OSLP+FS 1.006 0.770 1.776
OSLP+GCS 1.828 1.260 2.722
OST50+FS 2.292 0.894 3.186
SRTM+FS 0.177 0.947 1.124
For comparison, also included are SRTM and the more recent OS Terrain 50
datasets, both using local FS lookups, averaged over the same five test
paths. SRTM is much the fastest, because it is already in short integer
binary format, and has overlapping tiles, while both Landform Panorama and
T50 datasets are in ASCII text format, so every point on the path must be
converted from text to floating-point, and the T50 is much the slowest
because it doesn't have overlapping tiles.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Google App Engine" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/d09bb374-e6bc-4d6b-9f74-3430fbf92396%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
