Subject: CGAL users discussion list
List archive
- From: Olivier Devillers <>
- To:
- Subject: Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 09:32:17 +0200
Le 11/24/11 9:22 AM, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso a écrit :
Hi,
In all cases I run my simulations in Release mode and my concern is principally about the computing time. I am testing in a computer with only 2 GB of RAM, but I will use a powerful computer in some days. For this reason my concern is about the computing time.
Even when my set of points are 'degenerate' (in parallel planes), Can I always expect a result of Delaunay triangulations? How many time will I approximately expect?
You talk about the spatial sorting, and If I understand the meaning I cant use spatial sorting, because I have a fixed set of points and are in parallel planes.
If you insert your points one at a time, then a point location procedure is used to find where the new point
is added, if you insert all the points together using
dt.insert(begin,end)
where begin, end gives a range of your points, then the points are reordered first to be inserted in an order
that improves the efficiency of the algorithm.
Concerning the degeneracies, if your points are in parallel (say horizontal)
planes but are not degenerated in one plane
(no cocircular points) you may also improve the efficiency by inserting
first one point above the highest plane and one point below the lowest plane
to avoid many coplanar faces on the convex hull.
If you really need it, you can remove these two points at the end
(it will be costly but I guess that you still be faster that without these two dummy points).
Olivier
- [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Monique Teillaud, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Olivier Devillers, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Andreas Fabri, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Monique Teillaud, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Juan Carlos Lopez Alfonso, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Monique Teillaud, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Olivier Devillers, 11/24/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Daniel Duque, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Louis Lavery, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Daniel Duque, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Andreas Fabri, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Daniel Duque, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Louis Lavery, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Daniel Duque, 11/25/2011
- Re: [cgal-discuss] Computing Time Triangulation_3 vs Delaunay_triangulation_3, Monique Teillaud, 11/24/2011
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.