New approach to scenery generation

[D-ECHO]

About the space needed, well, the old mapserver was as large as to keep all v0, cs, corine, osm coastline/river/road and SRTM (RAW) data. Now the new server would only have to host decoded data (the raw data is already available via e.g. the terraGIT infrastructure).
Here an example for file size relation between raw data and decoded data (barrencover shapefile from my lofoten cs):

Code: Select all

BarrenCover:
raw data: 949,0kB
ogr-decoded data: 775,3 kB

and here for SRTM height data, also for the lofoten cs:

Code: Select all

SRTM-3:
raw data:  190,5 MB
preprocessed data: 35,7 MB

and finally for the airports:

Code: Select all

airports:
raw data: 34,1 kB
genapts-processed data: 275,2 kB

so the only data which is more after processing is airport data (note that genapts already included height data!)
[EDIT]Fixed code

[IAHM-COL]

Okay, I tested it in the Azores Custom Scenery and you don't really see it if you don't really look for it:
It mainly comes from the fact that the textures are starting at 0 in the new landclass and there are also some strange height-problems (which aren't that prominent, too).

Yes. We agree.
the tile boundaries should n't be this big concern. most of the time they are irrelevant; But not inexistent. As in: if you know what you are looking for, you'll see them.

I noticed these are more prominent in places with more elevation scheme (as inland). Once again, Azores? not a great test case. Try a more continental test for a worst case scenery. (by all means Azores is a poor test case -- if needed we just build the whole island. Never a problem). Try a real continental test case. (we wouldn't build all Europe if LIRA changed, would we!?)

When you test compare the result of the tile boundary with repeated pre-processing and without. I get differences, and same preprocessed data is better, but the result is not <<no boundaries>>. There are. The result for me is <<virtually no boundaries>>.

Both SHM and I have argued already many times that such boundaries, are then, irrelevant.

Torsten Does not agree:
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=520#p8772

No (my vote). Not everybody is flying traffic patterns. How does it look
from high altitude?

I am not agains a new scenery strategy but I hate to see a patchwork-style
planet one day.

[IAHM-COL]

About the space needed,

Yes. Can you provide a server? I can prepare it, if needed. (all I need is admin ssh access to such server --and it to be linux powered)

I agree. More action and less talk.

I you can provide a server where I can compile/install terragear, 2) download worlwide elevation 3) preprocess elevation and landmasses, and 4) set python scripts to identify "nightly" airport requests, and run the terragear for these, then I totally say let's go for this

I don't guarantee you this will see, as a patchwork, the light of terrasync, but, it can definitely automate updates for terraGIT and do this world-wide, which would be astonishingly great.

Finally, if the server can host 300 GB (or more) of http hosted data then we can distribute terraGIT in http mode (which works out of the box for FG 2016.3 and beyond)

I looked for options for last thing already, but so far it comes down to pay for the hosting, which I won't (at least not yet), and thus, if you can provide these capabilities, I am totally on-board.

IH-COL

[D-ECHO]

Nope I unfortunately don't have a server in my graveyard that's why I posted it into the official Forum while hoping there was a possibility to use already existing infrastructure eg the terrasync or the scenemodels server.

[IAHM-COL]

the idea is good. Let's keep it in the back of our minds while we find how to establish such server.

The core devs are all commited now to WS3.0 and thus I dont see them doing a big push for any ws2.0 related matters.

Ultimately it would be great if they deliver a more efficient world, with added advantages.

[jwocky]

Well, if it would be for some nightruns, I have the disk space and the cores, but no hardware over for an additional server. Sorry.

[laserman]

Well, if it would be for some nightruns, I have the disk space and the cores, but no hardware over for an additional server. Sorry.

thank you for your offer (and for hosting this forum)!
Would you add a user account and give ssh access to me, IAHM-COL or D-ECHO?

I have global elevation and v0 data, AirportObj and AirportArea for every airport, only a i3 CPU.

What I currently miss the most is a script that outputs this:

Code: Select all

min_lat="N10.5688"
max_lon="W067.023"
max_lat="N10.6334"
min_lon="W066.9652"


for every ICAO code so that terragear can automatically build
the required tiles for a requested airport.