Chris Miller wrote: > Thanks for the info. Sounds like you've found about the same limit I have > with --max-nodes and -Xmx4000m. This weekend I'm going to add a --max-areas > parameter. Setting this to a number < 255 should allow for higher a > --max-nodes > value with the same heap size. In your case with 367 areas, setting > --max-areas=184 > should allow for a higher max-nodes setting without any extra passes required. > Yes, that's a welcome addition.
While you're on it, dare I ask to check if it's easy to do some stuff in different threads? I notice that one core is at 100% almost constantly while the harddisk is still far from being maxed-out. There should be room to further speed things up a bit. _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
