[Talk-us] Deletion of unnecessary TIGER node tags will commence this week-end
Alan_Mintz+OSM at Earthlink.Net
Thu Aug 6 22:32:44 BST 2009
At 2009-08-06 14:03, you wrote:
>Alan Mintz wrote:
>>How about this: If a node has either a name or source_ref tag, only
>>remove the tiger:* tags and leave the source tag alone.
>Possible, but what about the simpler rule "only act on nodes when source
>is either unset or begins with "tiger_import_dch"? (This rule would
>exclude a whopping 910 nodes from the 172 million we are considering.)
I actually would prefer that the tiger:* tags were removed from those
nodes, since they are indeed not useful, though I suppose I could just do
this myself fairly simply.
>Another option would be to completely exclude every node that has been
>touched after the import (i.e. operate only on those with the pristine
>version number 1). That would exclude 4 million nodes from the operation
>(and leave 168 million to work on). On the downside, that would probably
>be a bit too conservative and leave some superfluous tags in place,
>especially where maybe a node has just been moved and the tags not changed
The biggest problem with TIGER in my area is position of the nodes. I've
moved thousands. I would not want them excluded (and continue to have lower
performance) simply because they were moved. I vote to hit those nodes too.
Alan Mintz <Alan_Mintz+OSM at Earthlink.net>
More information about the Talk-us