On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 08:47:11AM +0100, 80n wrote: > There has been a lot of work done to get the lowzoom tiles looking good (by > Alan Millar, I believe). > It would be a shame to have this good work undone by the appearance of pale > spotty tiles ;)
I have to admit that they are not very healthy looking. :-) I hoped that the paleness would only be a temporary thing, but I agree it would be a shame to lose the great work that has been done. > I vote for option 1 as the immediate quick fix - which should preserve all > the good work done by Alan, and then option 2 when someone has time to work > on it. OK, I HAVE TURNED OFF THE AUTOMATIC LOWZOOM GENERATION FOR NOW! CLIENT AUTHORS UPLOAD LOWZOOM TILESETS YOURSELF! Lowzoom tilesets comprise tiles from z6-z11, There are the layers 'tile','caption','captionless', just like before. Upload whatever you can/want. > The automatic server-side processing of lowzoom tiles looks like the best > approach, assuming the server can deal with the load. I suspect that its a > better trade-off than the bandwidth used by doing it client side. The server didn't seem to be bothered by doing the tile stitching itself, it was doing fine, performance wise. A lowzoom tileset took 40-60 seconds. spaetz _______________________________________________ Tilesathome mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tilesathome
