2008/11/22 Stefan de Konink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It is extremely tight to the webserver :) It is a native plugin
That's perhaps the tightest coupling and dependency you can introduce. This seems to be a show stopper for all those using Apache. :-< -- Stefan 2008/11/22 Stefan de Konink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Stefan Keller wrote: >> >> handlerosm uses Cherokee webserver and MonetDB. > > Jup :) exactly lean and mean ;) > >> Other OSM tools require MySQL and PostgreSQL/PostGIS: We don't want to >> load 150GB of data in three databases...!!! And many like to maintain >> only one webserver (Apache) and no other at the same time. > > It sucks I agree :) But why would you need the other two databases if this > thing gives you the performance (and better) of MySQL, and the GIS objects > of PostGIS? > >> Assuming that handlerosm isn't tied to the webserver, so that the >> replacement of Cherokee with Apache should be no problem!? > > It is extremely tight to the webserver :) It is a native plugin > implementation directly incorporated with the webserver that pools database > connections. (And uses it string management.) > >> How much of work would you estimate would be to replace MonetDB with >> MySQL or (even better) PostgreSQL? > > MonetDB is probably the fastest thing out there; the current scheme of > PostGIS isn't able to be used as OSMAPI. The eventual port to PostgreSQL is > proposed as paid work for the Dutch OSM grant. But for PostGIS it would mean > a hibride database. > > > Stefan > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
