GeoNames Home | Postal Codes | Download / Webservice | About 

GeoNames Forum
  [Search] Search   [Recent Topics] Recent Topics   [Groups] Back to home page 
[Register] Register / 
[Login] Login 
hierarchy table differs from geotree, PCLIX not correctly handled  XML
Forum Index -> General
Author Message
sourcerh



Joined: 12/05/2010 19:37:38
Messages: 33
Offline

Hi,

I'm using the hierarchy table, but I find some differences with the geotree. It should be the same I guess

For example, on http://geotree.geonames.org/?lang=en for North America, I can find:
geonameId: 7626844 : Bonaire, Saint Eustatius and Saba (BQ)
geonameId: 7609695 : Country of Sint Maarten (SX)
geonameId: 7626836 : Land CuraƧao (CW)

BUT I don't find them in the hierarchy table (not under North America, and even not at all in the hierarchy table)
The fact is all those 3 countries are A.PCLIX, maybe table hierarchy lacks those fields ?

HOWEVER, I have in my last hierarchy table (loaded today again), in North America:
geonameID: 3513447 : Netherlands Antilles (AN)

Which is not in geotree under North America...

This record is also a A.PCLIX

As a result, I really think hierarchy table is not consistent with those PCLIX
Any chance to have this corrected in the hierarchy table ?

Thanks for your help
marc



Joined: 08/12/2005 07:39:47
Messages: 4501
Offline

Thanks, the export was using an old table and the three countries are brand new and were still missing in the table. I have rewritten the export to get rid of the obsolete table.

I don't find any entry for 3513447 in yesterdays hierarchy dump. You must be using an old export file. The country Netherlands Antilles (AN) has been split into the other three countries and is therefore no longer included in geotree: http://geonames.wordpress.com/2010/12/20/curacao-sint-maarten-bonaire-saint-eustatius-saba/

Best

Marc

[WWW]
sourcerh



Joined: 12/05/2010 19:37:38
Messages: 33
Offline

You're right, I was doing wrong for 3513447, my table was containing old records, LOAD INFILE doesn't delete old records

I've corrected that, thanks for your hint
 
Forum Index -> General
Go to:   
Powered by JForum 2.1.5 © JForum Team