[geos-devel] Update to 3.9?

[Martin Davis]

Seems best to try a non-debug build...

To run in JTS you can use:

time bin/jtsop.sh -a ~/data/wsa.wkt -op OverlayNGRobust.unaryUnion

You should run off master for this (or a very recent pull)

Actually it's better to use

bin/jtsop.sh -time -a ~/data/wsa.wkt -op OverlayNGRobust.unaryUnion

That will time only the operation, excluding the I/O.


On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 7:30 PM Paul Ramsey <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca>
wrote:

>
>
> > On Nov 25, 2020, at 6:41 PM, Martin Davis <mtnclimb at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Actually OverlayNGRobust.unaryUnion will compare the current OverlayNG
> code to GEOS. However, OverlayNG is likely to be slower, in any case.
> >
> > So:
> > GEOS - 6.1 s
> > JTS 14.4 s
> >
> > That's an impressive difference in favour of GEOS.  I wonder why Paul's
> timings are so different?
>
> OMG, I wonder... I have a debug build of GEOS (because, you know,
> debugging). Is that it? Otherwise, are both tests (JTS and GEOS side)
> running through the OverlayNGRobust? I suppose I should ask: how do I run
> the JTS test? Then I can cut out the middleman and run them all myself?
>
> P
>
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 6:00 PM Daniel Baston <dbaston at gmail.com> wrote:
> > After collecting the inputs and writing to WKT:
> >
> > \copy (select st_astext(st_collect(geom), 18) from wsa_vi) to
> ~/data/wsa.wkt;
> >
> > I'm seeing 6 seconds in GEOS (not including WKT parsing)
> >
> > bin/perf_unary ~/data/wsa.wkt union
> > # Reading geometries from /home/dan/data/wsa.wkt
> > # Read 1 geometries.
> > # 6,137,885 usec
> >
> > vs 14s in JTS (including WKT parsing)
> >
> > time bin/jtsop.sh -a ~/data/wsa.wkt -op Overlay.unaryUnion
> > # 14.43s user 0.47s system 202% cpu 7.354 total
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 8:21 PM Paul Ramsey <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 24, 2020, at 5:01 PM, Regina Obe <lr at pcorp.us> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> All the performance talk is mostly because JTS still runs a lot faster
> > > than GEOS
> > >> for some bulk processing. My current test is a big union of watershed
> > >> boundaries, about 6MB of data, which takes about 20s under GEOS and
> > >> about 25% of that under JTS.  It's a big gap, and in theory the two
> code
> > > bases
> > >> are pretty aligned right now. Same overlayNG engine, etc. So I figure
> > > there
> > >> has to be a big implementation ball of performance hiding under the
> covers
> > >> somewhere. No luck thus far.
> > >>
> > >> I think we're close, looking forward to release :)
> > >>
> > >> P
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> geos-devel mailing list
> > >> geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> > >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
> > >
> > > You have your sample watershed data set.  Would like to test it out
> myself.
> >
> > https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ruvs6gxe3yl93c/wsa_vi.sql.bz2?dl=0
> >
> > I union all these. It takes about 20s on my Air.
> >
> > p
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Regina
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > geos-devel mailing list
> > > geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > geos-devel mailing list
> > geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
> > _______________________________________________
> > geos-devel mailing list
> > geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
> > _______________________________________________
> > geos-devel mailing list
> > geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> geos-devel mailing list
> geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/attachments/20201125/b6d345d7/attachment-0001.html>