From ajofaraguna at gmail.com Sat Nov 4 16:16:39 2023 From: ajofaraguna at gmail.com (Alessandro Faraguna) Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2023 16:16:39 +0000 Subject: [OSRM-talk] Question around duration of trip Message-ID: Hello, my name is Alessandro and I have recently started using osrm through its great R package (osrmr). When computing the duration of routes, I saw there is a slight difference with googlemaps when I check whether the duration is the same. That's fine as I imagine every software computes this differently but I wanted to understand if duration is an average duration (over the day/night) of the "fastest route" or the duration without traffic/at a specific time in the day? I can't seem to find an explanation in the online documentation or this option in the .lua file. Thank you Alessandro -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nils at gis-ops.com Sun Nov 5 10:35:53 2023 From: nils at gis-ops.com (nils at gis-ops.com) Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2023 10:35:53 +0000 Subject: [OSRM-talk] Question around duration of trip In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Alessandro, Yeah differences in ETA will mostly be due to traffic. Which the public osrm server obviously doesn?t have access to. Generally, routing engines give you the cheapest path. What cheap represents depends on the software, the data loaded (traffic, elevation etc) and somewhat the user preferences (OSRM/GM less, Valhalla/Graphhopper more). It?s pretty complex and you?d need to dig deep to get the full answer to the question ?what?s influencing ETA??. All the best Nils Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS On Sat, Nov 4, 2023 at 17:16, Alessandro Faraguna <[ajofaraguna at gmail.com](mailto:On Sat, Nov 4, 2023 at 17:16, Alessandro Faraguna < wrote: > Hello, > > my name is Alessandro and I have recently started using osrm through its great R package (osrmr). When computing the duration of routes, I saw there is a slight difference with googlemaps when I check whether the duration is the same. > > That's fine as I imagine every software computes this differently but I wanted to understand if duration is an average duration (over the day/night) of the "fastest route" or the duration without traffic/at a specific time in the day? > > I can't seem to find an explanation in the online documentation or this option in the .lua file. > > Thank you > > Alessandro -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at metaclarity.com Sat Nov 25 12:37:39 2023 From: paul at metaclarity.com (Paul) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 12:37:39 +0000 Subject: [OSRM-talk] File is incompatible with this version of OSRM (v5.28.0) Message-ID: Hi, my name is Paul and Im trying to set up OSRM on an Azure hosted Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS instance. When I run the command osrm-routed britain-and-ireland-latest.osrm OSRM returned the following error... [error] File is incompatible with this version of OSRM: britain-and-ireland-latest.osrm.ebg_nodes prepared with OSRM 5.27.1 but this is v5.28.0 (at include/storage/tar.hpp:201) Running osrm-routed --version returns v5.28.0 I reprocessed the .pbf files on my Mac(Intel) brew.sh instance using OSRM OSRM 5.27.1 as it has the ram capacity to handle this. I then copied the processed files to the Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS instance. The Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS was recently upgraded from Ubuntu Server 20.04 LTS which required a reinstall of OSRM. Im not sure how I managed to install v5.28.0 on the Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS instance as OSRM 5.27.1 is the current version. I followed the documentation in the Wiki but I must have made a mistake somewhere. What would be the recommended way of either downgrading to OSRM 5.27.1 or enabling the 5.27.1 processed files to run on OSRM v5.28.0. I would prefer to avoid preprocessing the .pbf files if possible. Thanks, Kind regards Paul ------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nils at gis-ops.com Sat Nov 25 12:51:00 2023 From: nils at gis-ops.com (Nils Nolde) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 12:51:00 +0000 Subject: [OSRM-talk] File is incompatible with this version of OSRM (v5.28.0) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ha, that is indeed curious, as there's no such thing as v5.28.0 yet AFAIK :D Easiest is to check out the v5.27.1 tag from the git repo on your remote machine after removing every trace of "5.28", and rebuild. That really has to work. Note, you won't be able to do the other way around without hacking around. Not sure what went wrong on your first try. Cheers Nils On 25.11.23 13:37, Paul wrote: > Hi, my name is Paul and Im trying to set up OSRM on an Azure hosted Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS instance. > > When I run the command osrm-routed britain-and-ireland-latest.osrm OSRM returned the following error... > > [error] File is incompatible with this version of OSRM: britain-and-ireland-latest.osrm.ebg_nodes prepared with OSRM 5.27.1 but this is v5.28.0 (at include/storage/tar.hpp:201) > > Running osrm-routed --version returns v5.28.0 > > I reprocessed the .pbf files on my Mac(Intel) brew.sh instance using OSRM OSRM 5.27.1 as it has the ram capacity to handle this. > I then copied the processed files to the Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS instance. > > The Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS was recently upgraded from Ubuntu Server 20.04 LTS which required a reinstall of OSRM. > Im not sure how I managed to install v5.28.0 on the Ubuntu Server 22.04 LTS instance as OSRM 5.27.1 is the current version. > I followed the documentation in the Wiki but I must have made a mistake somewhere. > > What would be the recommended way of either downgrading to OSRM 5.27.1 or enabling the 5.27.1 processed files to run on OSRM v5.28.0. > I would prefer to avoid preprocessing the .pbf files if possible. > > Thanks, > > Kind regards > > Paul > > ------------------------------ -- Nils Nolde Developer / Co-Founder Website: https://gis-ops.com Email: nils at gis-ops.com Phone: [+49 (0)178 5161 595](tel +491785161595) [M?hlenstra?e 8 a, 14167 Berlin](https://valhalla.openstreetmap.de/directions?profile=bicycle&wps=13.2618285%2C52.4299717) [social-icon-github](https://github.com/nilsnolde) [social-icon-linkedin](https://www.linkedin.com/in/nils-nolde-geophox/) mailto:nils at gis-ops.com [social-icon-github](https://twitter.com/gis_ops) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at metaclarity.com Sat Nov 25 13:39:31 2023 From: paul at metaclarity.com (Paul) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 13:39:31 +0000 Subject: [OSRM-talk] File is incompatible with this version of OSRM (v5.28.0) In-Reply-To: References:

<1D96F64B-939A-45B7-8F59-C1CE478CDF42@metaclarity.com> Message-ID: <83836f3c-01ad-4c7e-a0e6-e9f4100746a9@gis-ops.com> I wrote this yesterday, but it exceeded the mailing list's max size, so here is the scrubbed version:) Since you installed from source, apt-get has no idea of OSRM. I'm not even sure what it'd really do in this case, likely nothing. It should generally be fine to simply install over the current installation with https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Building-OSRM#building (after installing all dependencies), I do that all the time with other projects, but it's probably not "best practice" if you don't know the project too well. I just had a quick look: OSRM has an uninstall target, you can try "(sudo) make -C build uninstall" (if you did follow those instructions). By default everything should be installed to /usr/local/, I'd have a look if everything was really removed. Those convenience (likely untested) targets tend to get stale after some while. In case you're more familiar with Docker and it's fine by your IT, I'd go that route. Makes you independent of the host OS. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at metaclarity.com Sun Nov 26 16:43:51 2023 From: paul at metaclarity.com (Paul) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 16:43:51 +0000 Subject: [OSRM-talk] File is incompatible with this version of OSRM (v5.28.0) In-Reply-To: <83836f3c-01ad-4c7e-a0e6-e9f4100746a9@gis-ops.com> References:

<1D96F64B-939A-45B7-8F59-C1CE478CDF42@metaclarity.com> <83836f3c-01ad-4c7e-a0e6-e9f4100746a9@gis-ops.com> Message-ID: <30C7F8AD-856E-48F0-88D1-A4B48F2E7347@metaclarity.com> Hi and thanks again for your help with this and the useful info for future reference. As you mentioned the 'sudo apt-get remove osrm' didn't do anything. In the end I deleted the osrm-backed directory and enclosed files and reinstalled again after checking for the v5.27.1 tag from the git repo. There were no errors reported on installation and so far all seems to be working as expected. I did try docker on a development setup sometime back and it seemed to work well. But I never managed to process the .pbf files with docker due to memory constraints so had to fall back to a source install for this. I may re-visit the docker option at some point for the portability advantages. Cheers Paul > On 26 Nov 2023, at 09:36, Nils Nolde wrote: > > I wrote this yesterday, but it exceeded the mailing list's max size, so here is the scrubbed version:) > > Since you installed from source, apt-get has no idea of OSRM. I'm not even sure what it'd really do in this case, likely nothing. > > It should generally be fine to simply install over the current installation with https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Building-OSRM#building (after installing all dependencies), I do that all the time with other projects, but it's probably not "best practice" if you don't know the project too well. I just had a quick look: OSRM has an uninstall target, you can try "(sudo) make -C build uninstall" (if you did follow those instructions). By default everything should be installed to /usr/local/, I'd have a look if everything was really removed. Those convenience (likely untested) targets tend to get stale after some while. > > In case you're more familiar with Docker and it's fine by your IT, I'd go that route. Makes you independent of the host OS. > _______________________________________________ > OSRM-talk mailing list > OSRM-talk at openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: