On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, spaetz wrote: >> Could we then change the priority a bit? >> >> Currently hand-request with priority 1 can get transformed into 2 and have >> to wait untill the auto-tiles are done. > > Right, they are bumped down on purpose as people were requesting huge > areas with prio=1. There's not much sense in giving those a priority > between 1 and 2 as that would people to still bulk request their > continent and everything would be rendered before actually changed > tiles. While allowing quick interactive rendering of a few tiles that I > edit, I am not especially fond of allowing everyone to rerender the > whole of Europe, before we can process actually changed tiles.
Well, I get 2 nearly always when going around the world and requesting the problem-pieces (missing coastlines, missing landtiles, ...) Which means to see if there is a bug in the data or in the tile itself I usually need at least one day (as rendering takes up-to 4-5 hours or more sometimes). If you have the scheduler not go 100% after priority, but handing out some of the lower priority tasks from time to time as well there should be no need to change priority. And - Add a bulk update interface with low priority :-) For example ATM I would like to add a "render all mixed tiles" with very low priority to regenerate all the missing stuff without manual interaction. >> Having priorities from 1 to 16 and everything > 10 as auto requests >> seems to be a good idea. > > I don't really see what a granularity of 16 priority levels would gain > you over the current scheme. Auto-requests are kind of important as they > represent actually changed tiles. At the moment one of my goals is to get a world map which looks like a map without those many boxed problem zones. Until the automatics really take care of that problem finer priorities could help. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available) _______________________________________________ Tilesathome mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome
