On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Stefan de Konink <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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. > Let me see if I understand correctly what you are saying. You think that the currently proposed migration from the old server and old schema to the new server with a new schema that includes some referential integrity constraints will take longer than the time that has been planned for it? I assume that Matt and co. have done some benchmark tests on the migration and have some idea of how long they think it will take. Matt how long do your benchmark tests suggest the migration will take? How much confidence do you have in your test figures? 80n
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
