On Wednesday 22 October 2008, Sascha Silbe wrote: > > What is the advantage of having separate internal IDs? > > OSM ids are sparse (at most one object per id). Internal ids always > point to exactly one object (at least one, at most one).
For static data that seems indeed to be advantageous. In a second, dynamic index only OSM IDs may be relevant, except perhaps for cross-reference to the static index. > > Ah, nice. By the way, is all this still in (early) development, or is > > there already a description/website/demo online? > > There's no website or demo, but it works quite fine in router prototype > (routing works fine but CLI and postprocessing are not implemented yet). > It's available (license is GPL) in my 2008 GNU arch repository [1] as > osmbindb--devel--0.1 (the router is osmroute--devel--2.0 in my 2007 > repository [2]). [...] Thanks, I hope I have some time to have a look at it shortly. > [Geocoding with Gosmore] > > I remembered that it did. The feature list on the wiki says: > > "Incremental search of all tags. Results are ordered from nearest to > > farthest." > > Judging from Nic Roets' mails on [EMAIL PROTECTED], there is no spatial index > involved. Why would you need a spatial index to search for textual values? Do you refer to this mail? http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/routing/2008-October/000564.html It's an interesting topic (finding PoIs and such around some given location), Nic's solution sounds like a worthwhile idea. Generically, the idea would be that for larger sets of objects represented by the same tag (such as amenity=fuel, amenity=post_box, tourism=hotel, and perhaps even name=High Street, name=Bahnhofstraße) you would have a secondary spatial index (of any type). -- Freek _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
