[mapserver-users] shptree documentation

[Stephen Lime]

Um, er... What you see below is all there is at the moment. First of all there is
virtually no difference in performance no matter what format you choose. The
N option writes indexes as I originally wrote the code, this produced machine
dependent files. The L and M options write an index that is portable and you
should choose the byte ordering that matches your environment best. The last
couple of options tag a bit more information into the index including a magic
number so that apps could test for this type of file. The hard part is setting
depth (i.e. the amount of detail in the quadtree). If depth is set to 0 then a
depth is automatically calculated to try and store 8 features per node. I've
not run across any rules for what a good value is. I generally just experiment
with a few values between 4 and 10 and see how things run.

Steve

Stephen Lime
Internet Applications Analyst

Minnesota DNR
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155
651-297-2937

>>> Andrea Goethals <andreag at geoplan.ufl.edu> 07/13/01 09:48AM >>>
Where is the shptree documentation?  I was trying to figure out
what these are options are:


Syntax: shptree [shpfile] {depth} {N | L | M | NL | NM}
     N:  Native byte order
     L:  LSB (intel) byte order
     M:  MSB byte order
     NL: LSB byte order, using new index format
     NM: MSB byte order, using new index format 

Thanks,
Andrea