Bug report #19919
QGIS 2.18 faster than QGIS 3.3 DEV in processing
| Status: | Closed | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | High | ||
| Assignee: |  Nyall Dawson | ||
| Category: | Processing/Core | ||
| Affected QGIS version: | 3.3(master) | Regression?: | Yes |
| Operating System: | win 10 - osgeo4w | Easy fix?: | No |
| Pull Request or Patch supplied: | No | Resolution: | invalid |
| Crashes QGIS or corrupts data: | No | Copied to github as #: | 27743 |
Description
qgis 2.18.24 is more performing than the master version 3.3-0.79
I did various tests with the processing tools and 2.18 is faster than the master, in particular: the processing 'counts points in the polygon':
QGIS 2.18.24 time 90 sec
QGIS DEV time 134 sec
I attach db sqlite with point tables (> 1M points) and polygons
https://mega.nz/#!dYxjSQCY!eP69I0MWnyPBQ0zp8aDMYVCBRXQfQEkMJAGd9Y5-3Yg
Associated revisions
[processing] Remove unnecessary index creation in points in polygons
...and rely instead on the data provider's spatial index.
Refs #19919
[processing] Never run feature validity check for point layers
Saves a few cycles. The feature validity checks have no meaning
for point layers.
Refs #19919
History
#1
Updated by Nyall Dawson about 6 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Feedback
Is this running a debug build of qgis 3 (eg the nightly builds)? You need to compare against a release build.
#2
Updated by salvatore fiandaca about 6 years ago
Nyall Dawson wrote:
Is this running a debug build of qgis 3 (eg the nightly builds)? You need to compare against a release build.
I redid the test using the 2.18.24 and 3.2.3,
2.18 is much faster
regards
#3
Updated by Nyall Dawson about 6 years ago
What about disabling the geometry validation? (From processing options). Does that fix the regression?
#4
Updated by Nyall Dawson about 6 years ago
- Assignee set to Nyall Dawson
#5
Updated by salvatore fiandaca about 6 years ago
Nyall Dawson wrote:
What about disabling the geometry validation? (From processing options). Does that fix the regression?
Yes,
now QGIS 3.X is very fast
thank you so much!
#6
Updated by Nyall Dawson about 6 years ago
Faster than 2.18? (It should be!) I've got a pr coming in that further optimises this algorithm.
#7
Updated by Giovanni Manghi about 6 years ago
Closing?
#8
Updated by Nyall Dawson about 6 years ago
- Status changed from Feedback to Closed
- Resolution set to invalid
Yes. But I'd still love to see results for 3.2 with that feature disabled.
#9
Updated by salvatore fiandaca about 6 years ago
Nyall Dawson wrote:
Yes. But I'd still love to see results for 3.2 with that feature disabled.
Other comments:
QGIS 3.2 is slow at first use, after a while it resumes and I can not explain why.
test results:
2.18.24 time 90 sec
3.2.3 time 90 sec
but repeating the test several times the results change little.
#10
Updated by salvatore fiandaca about 6 years ago
I redid test after PR of Nyall in 3.3 dev
time 52 sec
thanks Nyall
win 10 64 bit
AMD FX-7500 RADEON R7 - 10 Compute cores 4C+6G 2.10 GHz - 8 GB RAM