Hi ZhiQiang, you mean the oneway procedure (step 3) removes nodes+edges leading to further normal subnetwork removal in step 4? This should not happen. The subnetwork should be removed already in step 3.
> On step 2, although there is a gate http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/703042503 > on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6374339 > And gate block that edge. Because of this gate the island is a oneway subnetwork (!) and should get entirely removed in step 2 IMO. > On step 3, a very important point are removed due to oneway If just one edge/node is removed there is something wrong. The whole island should be removed. Kind Regards, Peter On 29.07.2015 09:50, John Zhao wrote: > Hi Peter, > > I know the difference between subnetworks and oneway-subnetworks. > I am talking about the step 2 and step 4, not step 3. > > step 2 and step 4 are both findSubnetwork() with the same parameter. > minOnewayNetworkSize = 20, minNetworkSize = 200 > > I think I figure out why this discrepancy occurs. > One case is a island in SF bay area. The island has 2 oneway roads > connected to the main network. > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53726398 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6374339 > > On step 2, although there is a > gate http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/703042503 > on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6374339 > And gate block that edge. > The other oneway is connected http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53726398. > So, this island is connected to the whole network. > > On step 3, a very important point are removed due to > oneway: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/678314919 > > Then on step 4, the island are not connected to the main network. > > *Best Regards,* > *ZhiQiang ZHAO* > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Peter <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi ZhiQiang, > > hmmh, not sure if I understand what is unknown at your side. > > Subnetworks are different things than oneway-subnetworks. For > example 4-5 is a oneway subnetwork if connect with a oneway to the > main graph only: > mainGraph->4-5 > > And this cannot be detected in step 2. > > Please have a look at the unit tests to see more examples for the > different scenes > > Regards, > Peter > > > On 28.07.2015 20:05, John Zhao wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> the result I posted is not the result of oneway-subnetwork procedure. >> >> The total procedures include: >> 1. remove zero-degree node >> 2. findSubnetwork >> 3. oneway-subnetwork procedure >> 4. findSubnetwork again on graphhopper.cleanup() >> >> My question is, why those islands are recognized on step 4, but >> not on step 2? >> >> >> >> *Best Regards,* >> *ZhiQiang ZHAO* >> >> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Peter <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi ZhiQiang, >> >> I think it is because both networks are oneway subnetworks >> not found by the normal subnetwork procedure (but by the >> oneway-subnetwork procedure) and you defined the oneway >> minimum size to 20 >> >> Regards, >> Peter >> >> >> On 28.07.2015 03:13, John Zhao wrote: >>> Hi Peter, >>> >>> What I do is: >>> 1. minOnewayNetworkSize = 20, minNetworkSize = 200 >>> 2. build san francisco bay area osm data >>> 3. I print out the subnetworks result of the second call. >>> int remainingSubnetworks = preparation.findSubnetworks().size(); >>> 4. I found the subnetwork has some smaller than 200, like: >>> subnetwork start from: 37.32611992939085,-121.9961998312816 size: 24 >>> subnetwork start from: 37.78373608999855,-122.25065187925067 size: >>> 34 >>> >>> 5. I can't understand why the subnetworks with 24 nodes and 34 >>> nodes are not removed by preparation.doWork(); >>> It call the same method: >>> Map map = this.findSubnetworks(); >>> >>> >>> *Best Regards,* >>> *ZhiQiang ZHAO* >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Peter <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi John, >>> >>> sorry, I do not understand your problem or question >>> here. Would you describe it again step by step for me :) ? >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> Peter >>> >>> >>> On 27.07.2015 21:45, John Zhao wrote: >>>> Hi Peter, >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> Actually I only have 1 flagEncoder in the EncodingManager. >>>> The call is exact same, preparation.findSubnetworks() >>>> preparation.findSubnetworks() using edgeFilter which is also >>>> from singleEncoder. >>>> >>>> *Best Regards,* >>>> *ZhiQiang ZHAO* >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Peter >>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi John, >>>> >>>> it should not be related to calling these method >>>> twice. It is just one time where you calculate the >>>> subnetworks independent of any FlagEncoder or >>>> direction via findSubnetworks and the second pass >>>> is FlagEncoder- and access-dependent via >>>> removeDeadEndUnvisitedNetworks. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Peter >>>> >>>> >>>> On 24.07.2015 21:16, John Zhao wrote: >>>>> Hi Peter, >>>>> >>>>> I am still confused. >>>>> at first we call >>>>> map = findSubnetworks(); >>>>> >>>>> after the cleanup, we call the same method in >>>>> Graphhopper. >>>>> int remainingSubnetworks = >>>>> preparation.findSubnetworks().size(); >>>>> Why the subnetwork was recognized the latter time, but >>>>> not the first time? >>>>> we remove some edges make it not connected? >>>>> >>>>> *Best Regards,* >>>>> *ZhiQiang ZHAO* >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Peter >>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi ZhiQiang, >>>>> >>>>> yes, according to the wiki this is wrongly mapped: >>>>> /Avoid tagging highway intersections as that >>>>> does not make clear which way has the >>>>> impediment. / >>>>> >>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dgate >>>>> >>>>> Peter >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 23.07.2015 23:16, John Zhao wrote: >>>>>> Hi Peter, >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe the following one related >>>>>> with >>>>>> https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/388#issuecomment-88066385 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a look >>>>>> at 37.32611992939085,-121.9961998312816. >>>>>> It seesm related with barrier=gate at >>>>>> intersection. >>>>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1126492194 >>>>>> >>>>>> *Best Regards,* >>>>>> *ZhiQiang ZHAO* >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Peter >>>>>> <[email protected] >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> There are two types of subnetworks and >>>>>> the smaller ones seems to be 'one-way >>>>>> subnetworks' which means they are eg. >>>>>> only reachable as destination or start. >>>>>> But if you would start from a >>>>>> destination-only subnetwork you'll get >>>>>> 'not found' for all points outside of >>>>>> this network. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Peter >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 23.07.2015 23:03, John Zhao wrote: >>>>>>> Interesting, >>>>>>> when I increase minOnewayNetworkSize >>>>>>> from 20 to 50, the following two >>>>>>> disappeared. >>>>>>> subnetwork start from: >>>>>>> 37.32611992939085,-121.9961998312816 >>>>>>> size: 24 >>>>>>> subnetwork start from: >>>>>>> 37.78373608999855,-122.25065187925067 >>>>>>> size: 34 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Best Regards,* >>>>>>> *ZhiQiang ZHAO* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:55 PM, John >>>>>>> Zhao <[email protected] >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I tried car flag encoder with >>>>>>> following parameter on San Francisco >>>>>>> bay area data from mapzen. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://s3.amazonaws.com/metro-extracts.mapzen.com/san-francisco-bay_california.osm.pbf >>>>>>> >>>>>>> minNetworkSize=200 >>>>>>> minOnewayNetworkSize=20 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I printed all the remaining subnetworks. >>>>>>> edges: 591932, nodes 437420, there >>>>>>> were 3496 subnetworks. removed them >>>>>>> => 13121 less nodes. Remaining >>>>>>> subnetworks:5 >>>>>>> The remaining subnetworks are: >>>>>>> subnetwork start from: >>>>>>> 37.32611992939085,-121.9961998312816 >>>>>>> size: 24 >>>>>>> subnetwork start from: >>>>>>> 37.56018439442332,-122.30257814308803 size: >>>>>>> 436637 >>>>>>> subnetwork start from: >>>>>>> 37.78373608999855,-122.25065187925067 size: >>>>>>> 34 >>>>>>> subnetwork start from: >>>>>>> 38.180185962770565,-121.70631393878864 >>>>>>> size: 301 >>>>>>> subnetwork start from: >>>>>>> 37.85717050411933,-122.07633641532816 size: >>>>>>> 424 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't understand why there is >>>>>>> still subnetwork less than 200 nodes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have a look >>>>>>> at 37.32611992939085,-121.9961998312816. >>>>>>> It seesm related with barrier=gate >>>>>>> at intersection. >>>>>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1126492194 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Best Regards,* >>>>>>> *ZhiQiang ZHAO* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GraphHopper mailing list >> [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper >> >> >> >>
_______________________________________________ GraphHopper mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
