[postgis-devel] tester output

[strk]

I forgot to tell:
	MULTIPOLYGON statistics target was 10
	POINT statistics target was 1000

Here are tests for POINT with statistics target 10
(3000 samples / 8000 rows)

[lo:test_outputs]$ grep avg strk-point-stat10-AOI
    1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
    2   (best/worst/avg)        1       1.002   1
    4   (best/worst/avg)        1       1.25    1.022
    8   (best/worst/avg)        1       2       1.135
    16  (best/worst/avg)        1       2       1.108
    32  (best/worst/avg)        1       3       1.123

[lo:test_outputs]$ grep avg strk-point-stat10-noAOI                                 1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
    2   (best/worst/avg)        1       1.018   1.007
    4   (best/worst/avg)        1.002   1.75    1.086
    8   (best/worst/avg)        1.005   3       1.255
    16  (best/worst/avg)        1.009   5       1.323
    32  (best/worst/avg)        1.04    5       1.392

Here are tests for MULTIPOLYGON with statistics target 1000
(8000 samples / 8000 rows - the full set!)

[lo:test_outputs]$ grep avg strk-multipolygon-stat1000-noAOI                        1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
    2   (best/worst/avg)        1.042   1.546   1.24
    4   (best/worst/avg)        1.018   2.071   1.377
    8   (best/worst/avg)        1       2.6     1.456
    16  (best/worst/avg)        1       2.555   1.436
    32  (best/worst/avg)        -1.299  1.6     1.453

[lo:test_outputs]$ grep avg strk-multipolygon-stat1000-AOI                          1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
    2   (best/worst/avg)        1.021   1.546   1.23
    4   (best/worst/avg)        -1.107  1.952   1.424
    8   (best/worst/avg)        -1.006  2.333   1.487
    16  (best/worst/avg)        1       2       1.505
    32  (best/worst/avg)        -1.299  1       1.567

And here are the tests on MULTIPOLYGON run on PG74 
(the full set - original implementation by David Blasby)

[lo:test_outputs]$ grep avg strk-multipolygon-PG74
    1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
    2   (best/worst/avg)        -1.037  1.145   1.065
    4   (best/worst/avg)        1       1.14    1.119
    8   (best/worst/avg)        1       2       1.176
    16  (best/worst/avg)        -1.151  3       1.318
    32  (best/worst/avg)        -1.083  3       1.566


--strk;

On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 07:19:28PM +0100, strk wrote:
> I've made some tests with ~ 8000 multipolgons and points
> (italian municipalities boundaries and their centroids)
> 
> Here are the summaries of using the AOI/cell_area gain or
> not in the estimator.
> 
> Histogram creator function acts the same for points and
> polygons (no AOI/cell_area is used at that phase)
> 
> MULTIPOLYGON estm. gain = 1:
>     1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
>     2   (best/worst/avg)        -1.001  1.651   1.228
>     4   (best/worst/avg)        -1.158  41      5.456
>     8   (best/worst/avg)        -1.01   205     17.659
>     16  (best/worst/avg)        -1.081  214     13.073
>     32  (best/worst/avg)        1       203     13.578
> 
> MULTIPOLYGON estm. gain = AOI/cell_area:
>     1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
>     2   (best/worst/avg)        1.006   1.125   1.05
>     4   (best/worst/avg)        -1.164  4.6     1.493
>     8   (best/worst/avg)        -1.284  32      3.599
>     16  (best/worst/avg)        -1.085  26      2.461
>     32  (best/worst/avg)        1       18      2.18
> 
> POINT estm. gain = 1:
>     1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
>     2   (best/worst/avg)        1       1.018   1.007
>     4   (best/worst/avg)        1.002   1.75    1.086
>     8   (best/worst/avg)        1.005   3       1.255
>     16  (best/worst/avg)        1.009   5       1.323
>     32  (best/worst/avg)        1.04    5       1.392
> 
> POINT estm. gain = AOI/cell_area:
>     1   (best/worst/avg)        1       1       1
>     2   (best/worst/avg)        1       1.002   1
>     4   (best/worst/avg)        1       1.25    1.022
>     8   (best/worst/avg)        1       2       1.135
>     16  (best/worst/avg)        1       2       1.108
>     32  (best/worst/avg)        1       3       1.123
> 
> 
> Could you do the same kind of test  with your data ?
> Note that the tester now accept a list of comma separated
> bps values:
> 	test_estimator.pl table geom -bps 1,2,4,8,16,32 
> 
> --strk;
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel