[OSM-talk] Server slowness

[Martin Spott]

Hi Steve,

SteveC wrote:
> * @ 15/01/07 10:12:58 PM Martin.Spott at mgras.net wrote:

> > spent to import TIGER or shoreline data into the OSM database. For
> > PostGIS-based backends everything is already there, no need to reinvent
> > the wheel.
> 
> By this logic we should be using mapserver and geoserver too. WFS-T
> anybody?

I would not recommend Map-/GeoServer unless there is a certain
requirement to do so. Still having the choice to use these would be not
bad. Having the choice is always a highly valuable thing about
standardized interfaces and data representation.

> > For a start simply look at the "What tools work with data in a PostGIS
> > database?" topic at this page:
> 
> Sigh. We're building a wiki, not a 1970's GIS. Most of them just don't
> apply. We have fundamentally different problems. Nobody cares what
> format the nodes are in right now.

I'm sorry that the discussuion lead to some irritation at your end:
Nobody's talking about 1970's GIS.
What you're describing here is commonly called a design problem, no
wonder that you run into trouble that others have left behind for quite
a long time.

[... comedy deleted ....]

> Are you in the US?
> 
> I ask because people in the US tend to see OSM as a technical problem
> but in the EU we (or I, at least) see it as a social problem.

Well, thanks for outlining this. I typically call something a technical
problem when it actually is one, no matter where I live. The way you
represent OSM aparently is a social problem ....

> I really am all for moving the entire db over, tomorrow, to geo columns.
> But qGIS or mapserver compatability isn't going to sway me. If it does
> all the history stuff we do, if it's faster. No problemo, but please
> please just prove it and stop with the vague threats about forking
> effort or the mapserver compatitibility.

You're really a bit irritated. I was writing about trying to
collaborate on a common road network, not about forking.
Just calm down and face the facts. Please tell me when you're ready and
we'll try to discuss this in a more reasonable way.

Cheers,
	Martin.
-- 
 Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------