Hmm maybe i will give PostGIS a try, I am simply mystified why the quickest GRASS intersect should take ~47min compared to ~3min in ArcGIS. SAGA was the quickest for me at 15min although that produced the wrong results (did not intersect all the lines). Cheers anyways, Bjorn
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 8:45 PM, G. Allegri <[email protected]> wrote: > Keep in mind that with GRASS you need your data to be topologically quite > clean, because it treat them topologically. > QGIS's internal overlay processing isn't very optimized... > > Sent from Nexus > Il giorno 22/set/2013 18:53, "António M. Rodrigues" < > [email protected]> ha scritto: > > Hi, >> >> As expected, GRASS 7 out-performs all the others. Nowdays, when working >> with large datasets, I rather use PostGIS. Fast, robust. With GRASS 7 you >> can easily talk to your postgres databases which is a great help. >> >> You could try GRASS from QGIS but as far as I know, qgis doens't peak to >> grass7. >> >> Cheers, >> António >> >> >> 2013/9/18 [email protected] <[email protected]> >> >>> Any suggestion on this? Reason I ask is that its quite a fundamental >>> step in >>> my scripts. >>> >>> see >>> >>> http://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/71632/grass-v-overlay-qgis-intersect-speed-intersecting-line-and-polygon >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Intersect-Performance-tp5077130p5078413.html >>> Sent from the Quantum GIS - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Qgis-user mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Qgis-user mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user >> >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
