[Talk-us] Deletion of unnecessary TIGER node tags will commence this week-end

Alan Mintz 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 
>at all.

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 mailing list