[ODE] Slow performence in a given scene - optimizable, or "just how it is"?

[Jon Watte (ODE)]

The solver doesn't really matter; it only cares about joints, not geoms.

I would assume that you're better off with a static trimesh if it 
replaces at least three other static geoms, assuming the other trimesh 
gotchas won't kill you (contact count, paper-thin skin, etc).

Cheers,

			/ h+


Szabo Gabor wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> It's interesting: "condensing it into a static trimesh". A question, 
> that maybe already exists: when is it better to use trimesh geoms 
> instead of composite geometry (or vica versa)? Is it enough to compare 
> the summary of the polygon number in the resulting object? I don't think 
> so, and the answer could be is very useful. I think it depends on the 
> solver (world, fast, quick), the geom types in the object, but are there 
> any formula to calculate with to setup the more effective physic 
> geometry structure (trimesh vs geoms)? Or do I have to test each case?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
>   Uchimata
> 
> Geoff Carlton írta:
> 
>> Just on the face of it, 246 callbacks for 9 bodies seems alot.  Either 
>> its picking up static-static collisions, or else you've got almost 30 
>> geom primitives knocking around each active body.  If its the latter 
>> case, I'd think about condensing it into a static trimesh, or 
>> exploiting game knowledge to get a better partioning scheme than one 
>> of the standard ones.
>>
>> Geoff
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ODE mailing list
> ODE at q12.org
> http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode
> 
>