[Maps-l] Server admin procedures wrt ptolemy and ortelius

[Peter Körner]

>> Ptolemy and ortelius are, in the long run, *not* meant to be used by
>> toolserver users. Those boxes are explicitly separate. You can't run a
>> production database when users are running all kinds of inefficient and
>> uncoordinated queries on it. :) For now it doesn't matter, but keep this
>> in mind.
>>
>> Cassini is a toolserver, and managed by Wikimedia Germany. They do
>> things differently than WMF, coordinate with them to see what works there.
> 
> I hope that we can have a joint on project on maps and use resources
> efficiently. For example, we might not have space for the full OSM
> database anywhere else then on ptolemy. However, I think we can find
> a way to provide production-level stability and stay within our resource
> base. Besides, I have no objections to having exactly the same
> production/monitoring features on cassini as well.

Okay just one question from my tool-author's perspective:
Ortelius with a mapnik renderer will only need the PostGIS DB from 
Ptolemy, not the OSM-DB mirror. This Mirror will be used for 
Query-To-Map like features (and?) from the Toolserver.

So can't we go with a PostGIS-DB on Ptolemy and Cassini each, where 
Ptolemy is used from Ortelius for live rendering and Cassini uses it's 
own for customized render experiments with varying styles.

The OSM-DB however can be used directly from Cassini (r/o access of 
course). So what's lasting is the load balancing between the live 
PostGIS-DB and the OSM-DB used from the Toolservers, both residing on 
Ptolemy.

But I'm nearly sure I missed sth. :)
Peter