Hi Daniel,<br><br>According to the documentation of [1] and previous discussions [2], <br>v.rast.stats2 should be a lot faster.<br><br>You should be able to change the BASECOLS variable in the script<br>to only output the sums, which might speed things up for you. <br>
<br>Hope that helps. <br><br>Regards,<br>Daniel. <br><br>[1] <a href="http://grass.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_AddOns#v.rast.stats2">http://grass.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_AddOns#v.rast.stats2</a><br>[2] <a href="http://osgeo-org.1803224.n2.nabble.com/faster-than-v-rast-stats-td6500105.html">http://osgeo-org.1803224.n2.nabble.com/faster-than-v-rast-stats-td6500105.html</a><br>
<br><br>On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Daniel Lee <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lee@isi-solutions.org">lee@isi-solutions.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div>Hi Daniel,</div><div><br></div><div>Very cool name :)</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">You should use v.rast.stats [1] as it "Calculates univariate statistics from a raster map based on <br>
vector polygons and uploads statistics to new attribute columns.
" Should be a more straight<br>forward approach.</blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Thanks for the tip, but v.rast.stats gives me all univariate statistics and takes a really long time (hours vs. seconds). I've got so many pixels that I get segmentation failures and in the end I only want the sums for each polygon. It also makes it a pain to delete the unneeded columns from the vector table afterwards. Or is there a way to only have v.rast.stats give me the sums?</div>
<div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Daniel</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br>