<html>
<head>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr">Hi Andrzej,<br><br>thanks for the infos and the data. <br>When you see the 50 % faster operations<br>whith the 29483018.img,<br>is that in a rather low populated area ?<br><br>Gerd<br><br><br><div>> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 23:19:13 +0100<br>> From: popej@poczta.onet.pl<br>> To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Optimizing MapSplitter<br>> <br>> Hi Gerd,<br>> <br>> I have prepared a tile in a way you have suggested. See files here:<br>> http://files.mkgmap.org.uk/download/224/test.7z<br>> <br>> Archive include following maps:<br>> 29483019.img - map compiled by mkgmap with mkgm-test.bat<br>> 29483018.img - map recompiled by cGPSmapper with TreSize=511<br>> 29483017.img - map recompiled by cGPSmapper with default TreSize<br>> <br>> I have included OSM data and mp source too. You can create img for <br>> device using included mk_device.bat.<br>> <br>> My observations are following:<br>> <br>> All maps are work quite good in device, it is not easy to tell which is <br>> the fastest.<br>> <br>> I can measure differences in redraw time between both version of <br>> cgpsmapper maps, the one with TreSize=511 can be up to 50% faster in <br>> some operations (measured in nuvi 1440).<br>> <br>> Map compiled with mkgmap is fast, as good as faster version of cgpsmapper.<br>> <br>> Since mkgmap creates fast maps, I'm not sure now, if subdivision size is <br>> so important. Maybe not, or maybe there is still some room for <br>> improvement in mkgmap?<br>> <br>> -- <br>> Best regards,<br>> Andrzej<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> mkgmap-dev mailing list<br>> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev<br></div></div>
</div></body>
</html>