- 2017.02.06 23:59 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Paavo Helde
-
2017.02.07 00:04 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2017.02.07 00:40 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Paavo Helde
-
2017.02.07 00:58 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2017.02.07 16:16 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Dinesh Iyer
-
2017.02.07 17:36 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Dinesh Iyer
- 2017.02.07 17:36 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Dinesh Iyer
-
2017.02.07 20:01 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Olivier Paquet
- 2017.02.07 20:12 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2017.02.07 17:36 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Dinesh Iyer
-
2017.02.07 16:16 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Dinesh Iyer
-
2017.02.07 00:58 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2017.02.07 00:42 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by AG
-
2017.02.07 00:40 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Paavo Helde
2017.02.12 17:18 "Re: [Tiff] Qs about support for more than 2^16 IFDs and writing performance", by Dinesh Iyer
Hi everyone,
Do you have a timeline for when the fix for the slow TIFF writing will be incorporated into the library? If this might take a while i.e. more than a few months, is the workaround suggested in the github post https://github.com/escabe/libtiff/commit/58b4c3ba4478987ecfe1e793b9d925 e59eecfa36 reasonable? Can I use this as a temporary workaround?
Regards,
Dinesh
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Bob Friesenhahn < bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote:
As for the 64k limit, I think it's reasonably easy to fix it for sequential access but perhaps not so easy for functions like TIFFSetDirectory() because of the ABI. Whether we should fix the former only and how we could
It would be necessary to add a new typedef (similar to tdir_t) and functions for dealing with the larger directory ids.