Matt Amos wrote: > in which case we're trading development effort for performance. > i think we're operating in areas constrained by the lack of > available developers, so making the barrier to entry higher is a > tough decision.
(Speaking seriously for once...) Kind of, but it's not a simple trade-off. Certainly as far as Potlatch is concerned, server performance issues require development effort on the client. The problem that's been brought up both here and on talk, where the server dies halfway through a write operation and leaves the database in an inconsistent state, is an example of this - there are others. When TomH did the quadtile stuff, that added a degree of complexity for a boost in performance. I doubt anyone now would say it was the wrong decision. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Ruby-developers-in-Amsterdam-tp21433520p21436160.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
