Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Options to turn off backend #17

Open
cobar001 opened this issue Sep 6, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

Options to turn off backend #17

cobar001 opened this issue Sep 6, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@cobar001
Copy link

cobar001 commented Sep 6, 2018

@liuhaomin @wangjio

  • I believe the global ba is on by default. Is there an option to run VIO only?

  • If I focus on the speed of the VIO (the estimation part, not including image processing), which function should I time to get a good evaluation?

Thank you!

@wangjio
Copy link
Collaborator

wangjio commented Sep 7, 2018

  • If you want to close GBA:
    [back-end only mode] Set 'debug_gba' to '-1' in config file, and uncomment

    //#define CFG_DEBUG
    to define Marco 'CFG_DEBUG'. Then GBA will be closed.
    [run ice-ba] Change
    IBA_DEBUG_NONE,
    to 0x0000FF00, and uncomment
    //#define CFG_DEBUG
    to define Marco 'CFG_DEBUG'. Then GBA will be closed.

  • We provide function to evaluate LBA or GBA time consuming.
    For back-end only mode, set 'history_lba' or 'history_gba' to '1' in config file, then

    ICE-BA/App/run_backend.cpp

    Lines 431 to 436 in b004bb5

    if (tLBA) {
    solver.GetTimeLBA(tLBA);
    }
    if (tGBA) {
    solver.GetTimeGBA(tGBA);
    }
    will print the average time consuming on your terminal. If you want to do this in ice-ba mode, call GetTimeLBA or GetTimeGBA as run_backend.cpp has done.

@cobar001
Copy link
Author

cobar001 commented Sep 8, 2018

That works! Thanks a lot!

@cobar001 cobar001 closed this as completed Sep 8, 2018
@cobar001
Copy link
Author

@wangjio One more question. I got the time of LBA as you suggested, but it took 10+ ms on average, which is much longer than 2-3 ms as shown in the paper. I was running on my laptop with i7-6700HQ 2.6GHz CPU. I understand it is slower than the machine used in the paper but I did not expect such a big difference. Did I do something wrong or the configuration here is different from the paper? Thank you.

@cobar001 cobar001 reopened this Sep 26, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants