Comparing resampling methods in massivegeopackage
Revision as of 14:13, 8 September 2026 by Mbu (talk | contribs) (Created page with "There are a number of different resampling methods available in massivegeopackage. This article describes a benchmark to compare the processing time for each method when used on a typical dataset. == Method == {| class="wikitable" |+Benchmark dataset ! ! |- |Resolution |12.5m |- |File size |713 MB |- |File count |76 |} The benchmark was performed by running massivegeopackage on a typical topographical dataset covering Norway (N250). The test was run 6 times for each res...")
There are a number of different resampling methods available in massivegeopackage. This article describes a benchmark to compare the processing time for each method when used on a typical dataset.
Method
| Resolution | 12.5m |
| File size | 713 MB |
| File count | 76 |
The benchmark was performed by running massivegeopackage on a typical topographical dataset covering Norway (N250). The test was run 6 times for each resampling method. The first run for each method was discarded to control for any OS level caching.
Result
In massivegeopackage, the default resampling method is average, so we use that as a baseline. The column "Fraction" denotes the difference between average and each other resampling method.
| Method | Average time | Fraction |
|---|---|---|
| average | 42.45 | 100% |
| nearest | 38.50 | 91% |
| bilinear | 57.66 | 136% |
| cubic | 61.80 | |
| cubicspling | 60.64 | |
| lanczos | 66.82 | |
| gauss | 54.28 |