2007.07.03 18:37 "[Tiff] BigTIFF extension?", by Phil Harvey

2007.07.05 16:02 "Re: [Tiff] 16-Bit-Per-Channel Lossless Compression", by Bob Friesenhahn

As I don't speak gdalese, what size do tiles have in your test? It's my opinion ideally efficient tiles over a broad range of compression modes, that fit workflow on today's machines best, are in the order of about 1 to 3 megabyte, not the legacy 8 kilobyte (uncompressed, of course). I believe that for some compression modes, tile size does have a considerable impact on efficienty.


You make many assumptions in the above statement, and particularly
about how applications store/access their pixels. I would not
encourage anyone to write such huge tiles.

There are many major factors which influence performance:

I have done considerable testing and benchmarking in various scenarios
and results usually show that data access sizes of 8K or 16K are best,
with performance diminishing past 32K.

Your huge tiles have these problems:

Bob Friesenhahn
bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/