[OSM-talk] Server slowness

[SteveC]

* @ 16/01/07 10:56:55 AM Martin.Spott at mgras.net wrote:
> SteveC wrote:
> > * @ 16/01/07 06:42:31 AM Martin.Spott at mgras.net wrote:
> > > Please tell me when you're ready and
> > > we'll try to discuss this in a more reasonable way.
> > 
> > The barrier to entry is to just prove your point. It's that simple.
> > 
> > Please come back with timings showing your schema is faster than mysql
> > as it stands.
> 
> I take this response as a proof that you are probably unwilling or
> simply incapable of understanding the point why I decided to
> participate into this discussion. If you've simply lost the track then
> I'll write a summary for you, if you like (but don't expect me to do
> this immediately as I have a day job to work for).

Going back to a previous email, you said

'I simply decided to use what is considered as 'standard' in the
OpenSource GIS world and let those people tune the software who are
familiar with it, who have a long time background and therefore
simply know better  :-)'

Presumably you're using windows, as that's what's considered 'standard'
in the OS world? No, it's a false argument. It's what lead to the the
death of mapbuilder and the other well-intentioned projects. That and
thinking it's all just a technical problem.

Now looking over the stuff you pointed at, big heavy old data in postgis
with a big heavy WFS-T front end... what you're doing makes sense in
that world if you just want to bolt some things together. We're not
doing that. WFS-T is terrible for what we're doing, even the OS won't
use it. There are clear arguments for using spatial columns so long as
they maintain our conectivity model (so we can do routing) and history.

OSMs data model does everything in one, the routing, display and
history. It does it in the simplest possible way (perhaps bar dropping
segments) and there are tools to transform it in to any format you
like. It even naturally leads to a trivially simple RESTful API.

One more quote

'OSM decided to create their very own data model and start really early
with building and providing tools for editing. The OGC folks started by
researching, defining and implementing a standard for storage of and
universal acces to geospatial data, so the development of tools that let
everyone alter the data is a bit behind.'


I think this is just self-congratulatory 20-20 hindsight and evading the
issue that OSM is working and making maps, and the OGC folks arn't. Like
they were too busy drafting the latest WFS-T tome to do it. In a very
general way they focused on technology, we focused on maps.

> Still I'm open - as promised - to benchmark different storage
> architectures,

Then please, please do. You'd be the first and we can stop these debates :)

have fun,

SteveC steve at asklater.com http://www.asklater.com/steve/