You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hello,
thank you very much for the invention of the Nanoflann library, which solved many of our problems.
I'm having some problems. When the number of point clouds is less than 400K, when using knnSearch to find the 10 closest points of all points, Nanoflann+OpenMP is faster than PCL+openMP, but when the number of point clouds is greater than 400K, Nanoflann+OpenMP is slower or almost the same as PCL. Interestingly, if you search by radiusSearch, nanoflann is always faster than pcl::KdTreeFLANN. I would like to ask why this happens.
And please,how to solve it?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hello,
thank you very much for the invention of the Nanoflann library, which solved many of our problems.
I'm having some problems. When the number of point clouds is less than 400K, when using knnSearch to find the 10 closest points of all points, Nanoflann+OpenMP is faster than PCL+openMP, but when the number of point clouds is greater than 400K, Nanoflann+OpenMP is slower or almost the same as PCL. Interestingly, if you search by radiusSearch, nanoflann is always faster than pcl::KdTreeFLANN. I would like to ask why this happens.
And please,how to solve it?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: