[OSM-dev] Grumble, grumble

Stefan de Konink stefan at konink.de
Mon May 11 17:44:57 BST 2009

Matt Amos wrote:
> at a current mapping party everything works just fine. frederik has
> already explained how JOSM is going to deal with this and it doesn't
> need bbox locking on the DB. i assume richard is planning something
> similar for potlatch (?).

I am still sure people would love to see XAPI requests to overcome the 
current information overload. But that is typically clientside.

> bbox locking has its own problems, including easy DDOS, lack of
> concurrency, etc... but consider the mapping party example. if there
> is a way intersecting two editors' bboxes and they both lock their
> bboxes. now, neither of them can edit that way since it intersects the
> other's locked bbox.

API 0.7 will of course implement partial ways too ;) Having the bbox as 
a viewport. I don't see an easy way of DDOS unless you have a zillion of 
users all locking *=*. Concurrency is perfectly possible, what you don't 
edit is not locked (or if requested: hidden).


More information about the dev mailing list