Hi WanMil, yes, I got similar timing values. The testing is quite difficult. The results are almost equal when I change both versions to search only for one point of a way, so I am positive that it works, but there are still differences. I can't prove it, but I assume that both versions are wrong, because both don't find info for some points which lie inside the quadtree. I assume those are points that lie exactly on a boundary AND on a quadtree bbox. I'd try the following: if a point is within the quadtree , but no info is found, the algorithm should try again with a point next to the original. Would that be an option?
Ciao, Gerd > Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:20:16 +0100 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] [Patch v3] LocationHook with new Quadtree > > Now some performance facts using my standard 15 tile map: > > r2168: LocationHook time: 44,8s > patch: LocationHook time: 11,5s > > So the time for the LocationHook is reduced to 1/4. Great! > > But: > The tiles differ very much between r2168 and the patched version. So > there is some investigation work required to check if the patched > version does what it should do. > > WanMil > > > Hi, > > > > now complete and based on r2167. > > > > Gerd > > > > http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/file/n7181669/locationHook_speedup_v3.patch > > locationHook_speedup_v3.patch > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > > http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Patch-v3-LocationHook-with-new-Quadtree-tp7181669p7181669.html > > Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > > mkgmap-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
