Performance of find methods, comparison with linear search

[Renaud Detry]

Hello Sylvain,

> Some more details than the previous mail. Oh, I can't access the link.
> "you don't have the permission"...

Yes, the link got cut somehow. You need to enter the complete url

http://www.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~detryr/public/kdtree_perf_test.tar.gz

up to the .tar.gz.

>> My personal interest in libkdtree is an optimized within-range search
>> through sets of 100 to 500 points. From the previous comparisons, it
>> seems that in this case libkdtree, and probably kdtrees in general,
>> are not a better solution than linear search. Does this sound fair to
>> you guys?
>
> Honestly, I don't know for 100 to 500 points. But it really seems to
> me that linear search should be the slowest, especially if your range
> is small.

Yes, that was my feeling as well. However, I am not able to confirm
it in practice. Maybe the kdtree has some side effects, like
eating more proc cache... This could explain the overhead for smaller
point sets...

Renaud.