When running the rasterized subsetting benchmark on v4.0.2 (which does not have the optimized GeoJsonRaster code) we consistently see timing numbers between 16 and 19 seconds.
When running on @elidwa's development machine, the benchmark on main 5fc97115d2c8365046ad3021ba3eb38bbccdaf7e (which also does not have the optimized GeoJsonRaster code) runs in just under 8 seconds, while the benchmark using the optimized GeoJsonCode that is optimized d1e776b5fa0922c196b8230369d6b97af1cfd85f runs in just over 6 seconds.
When running on @jpswinski's development machine (which is an identical instance type to @elidwa's), we see the optimized code run in just under 4 seconds.
We need to investigate why there is this large disparity between the benchmarking runs.
When running the rasterized subsetting benchmark on v4.0.2 (which does not have the optimized GeoJsonRaster code) we consistently see timing numbers between 16 and 19 seconds.
When running on @elidwa's development machine, the benchmark on main 5fc97115d2c8365046ad3021ba3eb38bbccdaf7e (which also does not have the optimized GeoJsonRaster code) runs in just under 8 seconds, while the benchmark using the optimized GeoJsonCode that is optimized d1e776b5fa0922c196b8230369d6b97af1cfd85f runs in just over 6 seconds.
When running on @jpswinski's development machine (which is an identical instance type to @elidwa's), we see the optimized code run in just under 4 seconds.
We need to investigate why there is this large disparity between the benchmarking runs.