On 23/10/09 18:58, Anthony wrote: > You're likely already using that disk space, though. If you used a > materialized view for the current_nodes table, you wouldn't need the > current_nodes table. You're basically already implementing > materialized views, you're just doing so in the code rather than in > the database, which if nothing else makes it more prone to mistakes.
Oh I absolutely agree that the current tables are not ideal - they predate my involvement with things so are not my choice. My long term aim would definitely be to replace them with views. There isn't even any real reason why it would even need to be materialised - at most partitioning the table on live/historic and/or having conditional indexes should be enough. Tom -- Tom Hughes ([email protected]) http://www.compton.nu/ _______________________________________________ Geocoding mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/geocoding
