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
Just a quick idea I had since Erik asked for a different "padding" of Largo patches for point annotations. We could compute Largo patches at 3 different zoom levels (one zoomed out, one normal, one zoomed in). In Largo, users could cycle through the zoom levels by moving the mouse up and down in the thumbnail (similar to the left/right preview of video and volume thumbnails). This would greatly increase the required storage for Largo patches, though. Or maybe this could be made optional and additional zoom levels are only computed on demand.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Space might not be an issue but the number of files might. Our instance stores the patches in a Swift container, which currently are about 4M files. I've read reports that container performance can degrade if the number of files gets too large (10s or 100s of millions). This depends on the performance of the storage hardware.
Just a quick idea I had since Erik asked for a different "padding" of Largo patches for point annotations. We could compute Largo patches at 3 different zoom levels (one zoomed out, one normal, one zoomed in). In Largo, users could cycle through the zoom levels by moving the mouse up and down in the thumbnail (similar to the left/right preview of video and volume thumbnails). This would greatly increase the required storage for Largo patches, though. Or maybe this could be made optional and additional zoom levels are only computed on demand.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: