On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Dirk Stöcker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Matthias Julius wrote: > > >> OK - I wasn't aware that the ROMA servers were being used for other > >> purposes. That's why I asked first. If that's the case, then we should > >> leave the db alone. > >> > >> I've been trying to speed up the response time of my server without > having > >> to purchase additional hardware - guess maybe I'll have to look at some > >> additional drives. > > > > I don't think there is anything wrong with [EMAIL PROTECTED] dedicated ROMA > > servers > > as long it is clear to a potential user that its data is incomplete > > and meant to be for [EMAIL PROTECTED] only. > > > > They probably should run behind their own load balancer called > > roma.tah.openstreetmap.org or so. And they should include a comment > > in their data about the fact. > > I would not encourage such special handling in cases where the data is so > equal to the main API (i.e. I would have no objections for converted data > in other formats). > > One of the problems is that future is not really predictable and it is > much better to have an open interface compared to a short-term speedup. > It is already a bad idea that created_by is skipped in XAPI. Don't make > the same problems with ROMA. > I will fix that then. > > If on the other hand a standard interface can be established, so that > e.g. the server is faster when a "strip-xxx" request is done, but a > non-stripped request can be delivered nevertheless (as default) I would > say this could be a fine solution. > > Ciao > -- > http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available) > > _______________________________________________ > Tilesathome mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome >
_______________________________________________ Tilesathome mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome
