As promised, profile of v.generalize, as of r63952. (The data might not be exactly the same, I might have run v.clean somewhere).
I still have the raw profiles, if anyone wants them. F -=--=-=- Fábio Augusto Salve Dias http://sites.google.com/site/fabiodias/ On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Fábio Dias <[email protected]> wrote: > Attached is pdf generated with google-perf of v.generalize, using > g7b4. I'm running it again for trunk. > -=--=-=- > Fábio Augusto Salve Dias > http://sites.google.com/site/fabiodias/ > > > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Markus Metz > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Fábio Dias <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I fussed about the v.generalize code, thinking about pthread >>> parallelization. The geometry part of the code is *really* fast and >>> can be easily parallelized so it can run even faster. But, according >>> to the profile google-perf gave me, the real bottleneck is inside the >>> check_topo function (which uses static vars and inserts a new line >>> into the vector, not only checks if it breaks topo - got stuck a while >>> in there due to the misnomer). More specifically in the Rtree function >>> used to check if one line intersects other lines. >>> >> >> The function used in check_topo is Vect_line_intersection() which does >> much more than just testing for intersections. The process could be >> made much faster if Vect_line_check_intersection() would be modified >> such that connections by end points are ignored. But I don't know if >> this would break other modules or other functionality. >> >> Markus M
tr.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
_______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
