[Tilesathome] Threading maplint optimizing?

[David Lynch]

The question with this is whether there is enough time when less than
the ideal number of sub-processes are active to make the added
complexity and memory usage worthwhile. I've been experimenting on my
system with a change where the largest zoom levels are assigned to the
first (n-1) children and all remaining zoom levels to the last child.
On my two-core machine, rendering tiles for z17 takes about as long
(actually slightly longer) as rendering z12-z16 combined, so there is
much less time with a core sitting idle than with the stable client's
method.

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 13:32, Matthias Julius <lists at julius-net.net> wrote:
> Matti Viljanen <matti.viljanen at wippies.com> writes:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Just crossed my mind...
>>
>> I have a quad-core processor, so I no doubt use Fork=4. Using Fork
>> sure cuts rendering time, but I think it still could do better. I'm
>> referring to this kind of output:
>>
>> [...]
>
> The development version of the client has a threading branch
> (tilesAtHome/branches/threading) where René Wunderlich is trying to
> improve the performance of the client.
>
> The current forking scheme is clearly sub-optimal.
>
> Matthias
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tilesathome mailing list
> Tilesathome at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome
>



-- 
David J. Lynch
djlynch at gmail.com