[OSM-dev] Rantings about API 0.6
80n80n at gmail.com
Wed Feb 11 09:18:50 GMT 2009
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Shaun McDonald
<shaun at shaunmcdonald.me.uk>wrote:
> On 11 Feb 2009, at 08:52, 80n wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Brett Henderson <brett at bretth.com> wrote:
>> Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
>> > El Miércoles, 11 de Febrero de 2009, Shaun McDonald escribió:
>> >> Having a slightly less efficient import that ensures consistency is a
>> >> great thing, as it means that the database doesn't grow too quickly.
>> > I fail to see why slower growth is a good thing?
>> Slower (perhaps "steady" is a better word) growth has its advantages for
>> replication. Osmosis data extraction is fairly efficient and can
>> extract data many times faster than it is currently added, but
>> downstream systems can't always process it fast enough. So while it
>> would be great to be able to import data faster, there probably should
>> be an upper limit to import speed allow downstream systems to keep up.
> This is not a valid reason.
> Speaking as one of the downstream consumers of the Osmosis diffs we can
> take it as fast as you can make it.
> Thinking about it for a bit longer, wouldn't you like to be able to predict
> when you need to increase the storage capacity, or change an algorithm to be
> able to cope with the increased data. Or what about being able to predict
> when we need to upscale the main database server or run another donation
> drive for more servers?
In an ideal world I'd like to see as much data loaded as quickly as
possible. It's not the job of the data providers to shape their supply to
match the prediction of the data consumers. That would be putting the cart
before the horse.
> That's why I wouldn't want to suddenly see a week of the API being hammered
> with maximal data imports.
> dev mailing list
> dev at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dev