Matt Amos wrote: > in the case of quadtile, i think the extra complexity was > worthwhile. in the case of SQL in the amf_controller, i'm not > so sure. this is just my opinion.
Sure. We can even do more nuanced than that, if you like. :) In my opinion - and again, just that - the clarity of Rails is worthwhile and important in the write operations. putway is a lot more readable in Rails than it ever was in raw SQL, and it's more reassuring in terms of data integrity, too. Speed isn't really an issue here as these are called comparatively rarely. Where the raw SQL approach scores is in the read operations, which are incredibly simple, easy-to-understand queries. In Potlatch these are whichways and getway, in the XML API it'd be the /map call. The disadvantage of using Rails in this context is obviously that you have this huge overhead to create objects for every way or node, simply to serialise them and dispose of the objects immediately. Because they're reads, there are (generalising a bit) no integrity issues: and because they're very common calls, you get a significant speedup. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Ruby-developers-in-Amsterdam-tp21433520p21437005.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev