80n wrote: > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:20 AM, Stefan de Konink <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > I really wonder, considering the claims of the software that I am using > right now, if the API 0.6 upgrade adds referential integrity at 10x the > cost I see now, boy, that will be unworkable, considering that this is > already running on a 64GB system. > > Stefan > It isn't clear to me what you are trying to say here. > > Perhaps I'm missing some context as the rest of your post seems to be > about Potlatch. > > Is there any chance you could clarify this statement for me? Do you see > some problem that we ought to be worried about?
I am running a DBM that in test is roughly 10x faster than PostgreSQL, on TPC-H 100. That is basically a dataset of 100GB, the current tables of OSM are 'in data' also ~100GB. If the performance that I now see for checking constraints using hardware that is much bigger than the server that OSM is going to buy/has bought, I start the worry. Especially about the time that is reserved for the migration. I think you will not get the foreign key constraints checked in a weekend, not even if all foreign key constraints are right, which is not the case as you see in the OSM Fixer emails. As I wrote on the Dutch mailinglist, the work I am doing now is basically to make sure an API0.6 migration can go smooth at all. Stefan _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
