[Talk-us] city polygons too large for potlatch to handle?

[Chris Lawrence]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Alan Brown <adbrown1967 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> This might not be the right group to direct this technical question - but
> I'll put it out there anyhow.
>
> I noticed a little while ago that city polygons where added to the OSM
> database (at least in the SF Bay Area) - and that's a good thing.  There is
> a city boundary that runs along a major road between San Jose and Campbell
> that I meant to clean up, by getting it to run along the median of the
> street.  I was also going to redigitize this road as the dual carriageway
> that it is.  Here's a junction between Bascom Ave, California Highway 85,
> and some of the city polygon boundaries:
>
>  http://www.openstreetmap.com/?lat=37.254578&lon=-121.951574&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF
>
> Every time I try to edit (or even select) the city polygon - to delete
> unnecesary points, or to get it to run nicely up the middle of the road -
> potlatch gets stuck in a loop.  It eventually shows me a warning:  "A script
> in this movie is causing Adobe Flash Player 10 to run slowly.  If it
> continues to run, your computer may become unresponsive.  Do you wish to
> abort the script?"  After which, it's impossible to complete the edit.
>
> This problem is making it difficult to clean up this street.  Are the
> developers aware of this problem?  Is there anything that can be done?  I
> was hoping that the new version of Potlatch would correct the problem, but
> it's not the case.

Ick.  It's possible the OSM API 0.6 upgrade brought in polygons & ways
that are now too big to edit because they're over the 0.6 limit of
2000 nodes per way--it is not at all clear what the migration for
existing polygons/ways was.  You may need to use JOSM to do at least a
basic edit on these polygons then upload and continue work in
Potlatch.

(Alternative theory: Potlatch has also just been generally flaky for
me post-upgrade, so it could just be Potlatch-flakiness.)

Worst comes to worst I can try to blow away the California upload and
upload a 0.6-friendly version.  I have a very nice, mostly-way-based
conversion setup respecting the 0.6 API limits and using complex
multipolygon relations that I implemented starting with the Idaho
(complete) and Illinois (uploading now) boundaries; ideally I'd like
to go back and redo the boundaries in the A-H states if I can think of
a sensible way to do it.  (Texas I will have to blow away and redo
anyway, which I'm not looking forward to.)


Chris