On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Roland Olbricht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is this normal? Even the uncompressed XML takes much less space. And I > can't imagine that everybody else is using more than 120 GB of disk > space for his local copy. As this is the first time I'm responsible for > administrating the database, I might have made even a stupid mistake. So > I would be grateful for any idea about this. I don't have the exact times to hand, but it seems reasonable to me. It's to be expected that the db will be at least the same size as the xml - it's similarly uncompressed, and will have space between records to reduce the change of updating a row requiring all the subsequent rows to be moved, along with indexes and other implementation stuff like that. And I'm not sure how many people run their own full version of the db anyway - most people hacking on the rails_port just use excerpts of a familar area to populate the db as an example. Terabyte drives are fairly affordable :-) Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
