Timeline for Optimum raster tile size
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 1, 2018 at 15:08 | vote | accept | D_C | ||
| Nov 1, 2018 at 15:01 | history | edited | whyzar |
edited tags
|
|
| Oct 31, 2018 at 18:22 | comment | added | Vince |
Optimum in which respect? I did some benchmarking with various tile sizes and a standard process I was doing with the raster, and found that the default value (chosen by "-t auto") was extremely slow, and the value I selected (160x128) was not in the range of 32x32 to 100x100. Tile sizes larger than 512x512 resulted in much longer times than the tiny default. I'm afraid you're going to need to do your own benchmark.
|
|
| Oct 31, 2018 at 17:53 | history | edited | whyzar | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
improved formatting
|
| Oct 31, 2018 at 17:53 | answer | added | whyzar | timeline score: 3 | |
| Oct 31, 2018 at 17:22 | history | edited | D_C | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 24 characters in body
|
| Oct 31, 2018 at 16:28 | history | asked | D_C | CC BY-SA 4.0 |