Return-Path: <awaresystems.be+caf_=filtered=awaresystems.be@gmail.com>
Delivered-To: filtered@awaresystems.be
Received: from mx-f.one.com (mx-f.one.com [91.198.169.53])
	by mail6.local.one.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59E4F3001A2F09
	for <filtered@awaresystems.be>; Thu,  1 Jan 2015 20:36:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: by one.com
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Duplicate header field: "MIME-Version"
Received-SPF: pass (mx-f: domain of awaresystems.be+caf_=filtered=awaresystems.be@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.177 as permitted sender)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0-rc2
Received: from mail-lb0-f177.google.com (mail-lb0-f177.google.com [209.85.217.177])
	by mx-f.one.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2563C22A3F55D
	for <filtered@awaresystems.be>; Thu,  1 Jan 2015 20:36:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id b6so14114214lbj.22
        for <filtered@awaresystems.be>; Thu, 01 Jan 2015 12:36:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-original-authentication-results:delivered-to:delivered-to
         :mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:from:to:cc
         :subject:precedence:list-id:list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post
         :list-help:list-subscribe:content-type:mime-version:sender:errors-to;
        bh=c9RtFWTnPVI01kr0KBptVXY/NeCft5f+qsx10h46AXc=;
        b=EjsHg5x+w6n0m0kSSAgnKinHrPupaYT0TPXCLct8c2ehFYgikL6SOKrSeSG4ZAEP8D
         jeUCc/++CykVDx3SgKgNGvoENFhBfXtnP2pKWBUvNbQxuC/lszpmNCbtffEhlvrOFNiz
         Np5i3mk+B6RxqIzlWo70E5gbPnOhNt0v2IGeoiaqJde5yQscgs9IJHYiyYatOizJkOib
         uVcZCgYl0xWrp8VUYdHsNmbcdNN+pLPA/sxgrfm/LRzV0yBZHYFXzqaUYLWUS+JuZ723
         puWnoHMwUPg3kLbtH7dAEjy1X6mMDga9mE65j3ucsH4ARUQ2JyusiKZo5hiR4vPZelbh
         YAwQ==
X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;       spf=none (google.com: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
X-Received: by 10.112.170.132 with SMTP id am4mr3739679lbc.74.1420144580896;
        Thu, 01 Jan 2015 12:36:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Forwarded-To: filtered@awaresystems.be
X-Forwarded-For: awaresystems.be@gmail.com filtered@awaresystems.be
Delivered-To: awaresystems.be@gmail.com
Received: by 10.114.181.147 with SMTP id dw19csp2829168ldc;
        Thu, 1 Jan 2015 12:36:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.112.134.37 with SMTP id ph5mr53129687lbb.27.1420144579679;
        Thu, 01 Jan 2015 12:36:19 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
       spf=none (google.com: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
Received-SPF: none (google.com: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=91.198.169.53;
Received: by 10.112.34.39 with POP3 id w7mf15686185lbi.9;
        Thu, 01 Jan 2015 12:36:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Gmail-Fetch-Info: info@awaresystems.be 1 pop.awaresystems.be 110 info@awaresystems.be
Delivered-To: info@awaresystems.be
Received: from mx-f.one.com (mx-f.one.com [91.198.169.53])
	by mail6.local.one.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F00813001A2F04
	for <info@awaresystems.be>; Thu,  1 Jan 2015 20:33:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Duplicate header field: "MIME-Version"
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0-rc2
Received: from lists.maptools.org (ks365428.kimsufi.com [94.23.4.142])
	by mx-f.one.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4A22229A6F20
	for <info@awaresystems.be>; Thu,  1 Jan 2015 20:33:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.1.0.241] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by lists.maptools.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCD5035C068;
	Thu,  1 Jan 2015 15:32:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail-wg0-f51.google.com (mail-wg0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51])
	by lists.maptools.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 558C135C024
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Thu,  1 Jan 2015 15:20:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f51.google.com with SMTP id x12so23121304wgg.24
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Thu, 01 Jan 2015 12:20:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.110.69 with SMTP id hy5mr145435175wjb.121.1420143634516; 
	Thu, 01 Jan 2015 12:20:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.161.196 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Jan 2015 12:20:34 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.2.01.1501011102040.18732@freddy.simplesystems.org>
References: <CAK8GPyDdAzUwt7ZTmfF+NT+ceGwvxFPUD+CRq6unxT9KEe5JwQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.GSO.2.01.1501011102040.18732@freddy.simplesystems.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2015 15:20:34 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK8GPyAfmhtC3OaokrkAuLX75iWfDCHnhPS+sjyyZvFE=N6w5A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aaron Boxer <boxerab@gmail.com>
To: Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us>
Cc: TIFF mailing list <tiff@lists.maptools.org>
Subject: Re: [Tiff] Fast TIFF Reading on Windows
X-BeenThere: tiff@lists.maptools.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TIFF and libtiff discussion <tiff.lists.maptools.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/private/tiff>
List-Post: <mailto:tiff@lists.maptools.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0551965885=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
Errors-To: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org

--===============0551965885==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e010d867add988f050b9cf406

--089e010d867add988f050b9cf406
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Bob Friesenhahn <
bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote:

> On Thu, 1 Jan 2015, Aaron Boxer wrote:
>
>  Can anyone recommend the very fastest way of reading TIFF files on
>> windows?
>> For example, there are several ways of reading in the file, including
>> memory mapping. Has anyone benchmarked performance on
>> recent versions of windows?
>>
>
> You should be more specific.  A common benchmark method is to read the
> same file repeatedly.  I suspect that you are more interested in first-read
> performance of a large series of images which in total are far larger than
> system memory.  These situations are completely different.
>
> NTFS blocksize can be a factor and the blocksize is specified when the
> filesystem is created.  The blocksize is important since blocksize amount
> of data will be read (perhaps wastefully) if any byte in the block is
> accessed.  Likewise, larger blocks may result in less apparent
> fragmentation with large files.  The NTFS blocks are still stored accross
> 512 byte or 4k byte disk sectors.
>
> Windows does not seem to cache filesystem data as agressively as some
> other systems, which can be both a hinderance and a benefit.
>
> Memory mapped file reads under Windows seem rather similar to Linux.
>


Thanks. Yes, my use case is: first-read of many 10-15 MB RGB uncompressed
files.  Unfortunately, I don't have control over how the files are stored,
i.e. block size.  One nice feature on Linux is fadvise, where I can specify
FADV_SEQUENTIAL | FADV_DONTNEED, which would be right for my use case.

--089e010d867add988f050b9cf406
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Bob Friesenhahn <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;=
<a href=3D"mailto:bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us" target=3D"_blank">bfriesen@=
simple.dallas.tx.us</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204=
);padding-left:1ex"><div><div>On Thu, 1 Jan 2015, Aaron Boxer wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Can anyone recommend the very fastest way of reading TIFF files on windows?=
<br>
For example, there are several ways of reading in the file, including memor=
y mapping. Has anyone benchmarked performance on<br>
recent versions of windows?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div></div>
You should be more specific.=C2=A0 A common benchmark method is to read the=
 same file repeatedly.=C2=A0 I suspect that you are more interested in firs=
t-read performance of a large series of images which in total are far large=
r than system memory.=C2=A0 These situations are completely different.<br>
<br>
NTFS blocksize can be a factor and the blocksize is specified when the file=
system is created.=C2=A0 The blocksize is important since blocksize amount =
of data will be read (perhaps wastefully) if any byte in the block is acces=
sed.=C2=A0 Likewise, larger blocks may result in less apparent fragmentatio=
n with large files.=C2=A0 The NTFS blocks are still stored accross 512 byte=
 or 4k byte disk sectors.<br>
<br>
Windows does not seem to cache filesystem data as agressively as some other=
 systems, which can be both a hinderance and a benefit.<br>
<br>
Memory mapped file reads under Windows seem rather similar to Linux.<span><=
font color=3D"#888888"><br></font></span></blockquote><div><br><br></div><d=
iv>Thanks. Yes, my use case is: first-read of many 10-15 MB RGB uncompresse=
d files.=C2=A0 Unfortunately, I don&#39;t have control over how the files a=
re stored, i.e. block size.=C2=A0 One nice feature on Linux is fadvise, whe=
re I can specify FADV_SEQUENTIAL | FADV_DONTNEED, which would be right for =
my use case.
</div><br><br><br></div></div></div>

--089e010d867add988f050b9cf406--

--===============0551965885==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Tiff mailing list: Tiff@lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/
--===============0551965885==--
