<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br /><br /><br />3. Nov 2018 14:16 by <a href="mailto:kurt@roeckx.be" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">kurt@roeckx.be</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">On Sat, Nov 03, 2018 at 01:37:52PM +0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:<blockquote>1. Nov 2018 16:30 by <a href="mailto:kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com</a> <<a href="mailto:mailto:kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">mailto:kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com</a>>:<br /><br /><br />> In both use cases, the major purpose of the foreign key is to avoid manual review in the case where OSM will not be updated. If an object (retrieved by key) is unchanged since the last import, in both OSM and the external database, then there is no work to be done.<br /><br />Is there some reason why storing "object with id in database XYZ was uploaded as OSM object <br />with id 717373737" should be stored in OSM?<br /><br />This data is useful only to whoever made the import and keeps updating data. Others,<br />even when working with the same data must anyway verify whatever OSM objects really match<br />objects in the external database.</blockquote><br />So you're suggesting storing the relation between the 2 database<br />in a 3rd database?<br /></blockquote><p> </p><p>Yes. Though simple text file should be also sufficient. I am still not convinced that this data will be</p><p><br /></p><p>useful to anybody except to single person repeating synchronization from specific database for</p><p><br /></p><p>some time.<br /></p> </body>
</html>