[Tilesathome] t at h/osmarender being phased out (at least from my side)

[Sebastian Spaeth]

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:14:56 +0100, ben <ben at nerdlabor.de> wrote:
> oh no! I hope I will hit the Top100 before everything breaks up! ;)

Good luck with that :).
 
> Despite the personal things and disadvantages, do you (and all other
> readers) see any
> reasons for t at h to be alive? I mean, is the effort worth to be done by
> possible "volunteers".

Well, it essentially has been running by volunteers all the time :-).

> if not, then nobody will miss t at h and all are good to go to other projects.
> which leads me to the question: what server specs would be needed? how many
> time should
> be spent to "keep the thing running", etc.?

Well, besides a few GB of fast disk (we are on a SAN array with 1.5TB of
which we use something like 600GB or so, but that changes depending on
how many layers one wants), the server is pretty modest (4GB of RAM,
dual core Intel). It is kept (CPU) busy by stitching the low zoom tiles
continuously, otherwise it wouldn't even be very CPU intensive. It needs
a healthy up and download bandwidth. It has been a long time since I
measured bandwidth, but it has maxed out the 10MBit/s connection up and
down pretty much all the time (or was it 100MBit, well in the ballbark
of 8TB up and 8TB down per Month).

So disk and bandwidth mainly. Also the Read-only mirrors (TRAPIs) that
are required by the clients would need some reinforcement, judging from
the latest mails to this list.
 
> would love to hear any thoughts!

I would be happy to see t at h survive, it is a fun system and as
independent from OSMF as it gets.

Sebastian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tilesathome/attachments/20110228/bb3ca1bb/attachment.pgp>