What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
74 Comments
- gaberowe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21I'm sure this is temporary... lets say that there are about 10,000 people (probably a small estimate) with systems that at are pummeling the google maps api with 1 hit every second. Well, assuming that the database that has to convert an address to a lat/long pair takes maybe 2-3 DB hits required for the lookup would mean that they are getting 10,000*86,400*3=2.6 Billion DB hits per second... so yea, this is a problem... once they get the entire DB cached or at least the primary cities, then they'll raise the number to probably 1 hit per second allowed. say the packet was 10k, that'd be 26 gigs per second?/ jeez
It does beg the question--how could this actually scale as people want this service for probably everything in the future? that should be the subject of somebody's research--how will all of these GIS systems scale for widespread use??? I bet if you had the answer to that somebody would be interested in hiring you at google... - egbert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16"lets say that there are about 10,000 people (probably a small estimate) with systems that at are pummeling the google maps api with 1 hit every second. Well, assuming that the database that has to convert an address to a lat/long pair takes maybe 2-3 DB hits required for the lookup would mean that they are getting 10,000*86,400*3=2.6 Billion DB hits per second..."
I guess that is some of that new math. 10,000*3=30,000. Why did you add the 86,400 factor? That is the number of seconds in a day. So they are getting 2.6 Billion DB hits per day and not per second. - Wisgary, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Huh? I saw that when I registered for an API key months ago... did they just change the quantities of available requests?
Also, that garretrogers person really creeps the hell out of me. His picture is disturbing. - MagicBobert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Agreed. This restriction has been in their TOS for months, not minutes...
Marked as inaccurate. - sw17ch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Just a thought, but is there anything in their terms of service that says the coordinates can't be cached? In other places of their documentation I've noticed that they encourage caching of data. I cache some relatively static addresses so that 1) my users's load time is faster, and 2) my application doesn't hit google's servers nearly as much.
Good? Bad? Illegal? - donjaime, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13... without hits to their server google doesn't know (and doesn't care) if you cache. They restrict usage of the API for bandwidth reasons. You are fine.
- bexmex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13This is not news. That restriction has been in there for months.
If any of the popular mashups would have problems, we would have seen them a long time ago.
What's the big deal? Just cache the geocode data locally, and quit bugging Google for each page load. Unless you're trying to totally re-implement Google Maps, one geocode request per 2 seconds should be more than enough. - spazoidspam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I also could have sworn there was already a limit, because I specifically remember reading it and thinking "oh, ill never go over that limit".
And they didn't really say "stop it", they said "please do it less" - jwcooper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7This seems perfectly reasonable to me. 50,000 requests in one day is a lot. Any site that is using more than 50k requests in 24 hours has gone beyond being a hobby site, and is most likely profiting.
This makes sense, as long as Google has a means of licensing the service for more requests for a fee. - gaberowe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6yep you're right, should have said "per day". thanks for pointing that out... yea, 86,400 seconds per DAY! whoops
- bittermang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I seem to recall they encourage you to cache results somewhere in the API docs. Plus it's just better to cache them anyway because then your server doesn't have to ask Google for Every. Single. Individual. Separate. Standalone. Address request. I imagine the Google Maps API feels like a nanny or a mother at times with all the requests.
- sensibledriver, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So, this rube just got around to reading the TOS...everybody panic!!!!!!!
Marked as Inaccurate. - Chewy_95118, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12Why is it lately all the first comments are lame? Is the total IQ of the digg membership going down, or are just more stupid people making comments
- xile, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The change is specific to the geocoding service. There has always been a 50,000 hits/key/day limit for the main map, but before now there has not been a limit for the geocoding service. 50,000 hits never has been a problem, because it's only the initial load that counts. Now that each geocode request counts towards the limit, we may start to see a problem on some of the larger sites (assuming they're using the geocoding feature, which hasn't been something I've needed on any of the google maps mashups I've built).
- isnoop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Simple solution... just cache your results and check your database before going to Google. As a side benefit, you'll greatly speed up your app!
Now that my most popular mapping tool ( http://isnoop.net/tracking ) has been around a while, I almost never send requests to Google. - camturner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3GoogleMapsBook.com reported this limit on June 21st 2006. It's old news.... Very old news.
- bardo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I didn't think this was a new restriction--when I started playing with google maps, I saw there was a limit and decided to check out yahoo's lookup--you can use their lookup code for coordinates and still use the superior google maps for mapping. On the back end side, if you cache the results and possibly use two or more services for lookup, you're going to be fine.. unless you're extremely popular, in which case, time to get off your wallet.
Cheers, - MagicBobert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3How are IP lookups needed to do geocoding? Not trying sound mean or anything I just don't understand why you would need to do an IP lookup to geocode an address.
- digjedi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Why the hell are people hitting Google's lat/long lookup so much? If you need that data, then do a one time lookup - and save it in a database. This is 95% a problem due to lazy ass coders - "no need to cache or save to database or make a xml solution... I'll just keep slamming Google." But on an interesting note it's nice to see Google finally crack. They've allowed users to slam on all their services of ages without an issue... but now they can't take it...
- jonnyq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I can't think of a single legitimate application where you would NEED to do that many geocodes. On an application we use here at work, once we do a geocode once, we store the lat/long in a database so we don't have to ask Google for it again. I think that's the only reasonable thing to do - once you've done a Geocode once, store it permanently so you don't have to ask google for it again.
I GUESS if you have a web site where someone can type in a free-form address and get a map, then storing them might be cumbersome - but in that case, shouldn't you just link them to maps.google.com instead of trying to recrease maps.google.com on your own web site? - lelio98, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You also, don't have to use Google's geocoding service, you can geocode from a number of other sources and then just get the map from Google. I suspect that the geocoding requests were having a negative impact on their mapping service, so they simply want to limit access... No biggie...
- Nogger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Really? The earliest reference I find (by a quick query) about the limit is from June 12: http://groups.google.de/group/Google-Maps-API/msg/d53d9dc3be0dc387?
- shackprices, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Google includes a built in caching module for javascript geocoding requests and asks developers to cache their non-client side geocodes.
- Dotnetsky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Seems that most commenters understand that if you have a web page that hits the API for a lat / long pair, you want to do this only once and cache it - not only because your web page will be much faster, but so that you don't abuse the nice service the google people have provided. BTW, Microsoft's locate.ashx resource handler requires no API key and has no published restrictions that I've seen. This returns the latitude and longitude of the machine making the request:
http://local.live.com/WiFiIPService/locate.ashx - wildmXranat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I remember this being a part of TOS before.
- ddn3d, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7If you're using 50K q/day and not caching you are an idiot.
If you're using 50K q/day and not monetizing you are a fool.
If you're using 50K q/day and monetizing, you can afford to pay for one of the (cheap) geocoding services.
Buried. - TheSak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This article is about geocoding from physical street addresses, not IP addresses.
- dicerandom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2By the time you start hitting 50k queries a day you need to pay for your own geocoding.
http://geocoder.us/ - element, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You can't blame them, I've heard their API has been abused for months now.
- SnapETom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Did you actually click on that link I posted before you mouthed off? Those *are* directions to downloading the Tiger data and accessing it through the CPAN Geo::Coder::US module.
- Nogger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This restriction has been there from minute one. Furthermore, it does not affect the service. When someone submits his house / appartement / etc. to be included, query the geocoder and safe the coordinates in the database. No problem whatsoever.
- murraj2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This would be ***** for a site like housingmaps.com which I believe is not for profit. Hopefully they're not exceeding the 50K a day hits, or could arrange some sort of deal with google.
- Palantar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes, I also looked in the June timeframe and this restriction was there. Completely inaccurate.
- isnoop, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2That's not a DIY geocoder. It's just another API like Google's service. Worse yet is the fact that they have even tighter limits on how often you can submit requests. Unless you pay them, you can only request once every few seconds.
If you really want to build your own geocoder, you'll have to download the US Census Bureau's TIGER data and get to chomping. That's several gigs worth of text that you'll have to convert to usable info. - strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, I'd say switch to yahoo. Unless you're an anti-flash nazi I can't imagine anyone who still thinks that Google's map interface is superior to Yahoo Maps.
My favorite yahoo maps feature: You can just right-click on the map and select "Directions here". No need to know the address. - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Actually after reading http://www.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/ it appears I wasn't undrestanding geocoding in this sense. Geocoding in this sense maps an address to a longitude/latitude, I was thinking it goes from an IP to longitude/latitude. I know google uses digital envoy but they don't use it here, sorry.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know why the article says this just happened a few moments ago. At ZedZone we implemented geocoding using the Google Maps API in August and the terms of use had the _exact same_ paragraph in it. You can only do 50000 per day, and it's been like that for months, at least.
Our solution was to track how many we were making, and after 50000 requests in the day we switch to a backup geocoding service that we have to pay for. We also cache the geocodes so they don't have to be repeated.
Either way, 50000 requests in a single day is really a lot. - ishmal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is a very good thing, IMHO. There is really no reason to not use result caching and other forms of optimization. Just because developers' Google queries in the past have always been rapid, and with low latency, there is no excuse to be lazy in their code. If this forces/encourages developers to have more discipline in their design, then it is a blessing. Besides, it would cut down on their bandwidth and CPU just a little bit, too.
- soogy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They're not lazy coders, they're just ***** stupid. These people shouldn't even be touching servers with a ten-foot pole. I mean, really, how hard is it to understand optimization?
A HUGE database must be constantly accessed to retrieve these latitude/longitude values, and then YOUR server, if not the client via JavaScript, has to constantly get that value. This all slows down response time immensely. Access it once! CACHE IT! - johnie1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1eck, they got a point. i'm off to me map now to take it off, poor old Google.
- Gala, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:7ki_vp-ScCUJ:www.google.com/apis/maps/terms.html+http://www.google.com/apis/maps/terms.html&hl=en&gl=ca&ct=clnk&cd=1
the restriction wasn't there as of 15 Dec 2006 21:02:02 GMT - bradleyland, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It would be a bit ironic if they did raise a stink, considering their standpoint on "caching" copyrighted images in the Google image cache.
- livejamie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1google's map service has been very very very slow lately
- m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't see a real problem with the limit. You don't have to turn users away, simply put them in a queue. Then within a week you can still do 350,000 geocodes.
Typically you only need to geocode for a user once, so this still gives all but a few developers the ability to do their geocodes in a single day without the need for a processing queue.
If they do 50,000+ registrations a day, then they should maybe start making money on their site and buy into the enterprise class API. I'm pretty sure with that you get far fewer restrictions, if any at all. - nyabutid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Just have a running day cache. It is the right way to do it anyway.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4ricosalomar is correct, don't digg him down. "Beg the question" does not mean "raises the question." It means "presumes the assumption you are trying to assert." People who use it the wrong way end up sounding like ignorant hicks.
http://begthequestion.info/ - urlord, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0looks like Google farm is not as omni-powerful as everybody think...
- soundphan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Headline is misleading - marked inaccurate.
- Matt2k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1> Also, that garretrogers person really creeps the hell out of me. His picture is disturbing.
I'd hit It
.. OH wait, is that a guy?
Hmm. Considering.. Considering.. - seraphzero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0One of my company's products does a google maps mashup with real estate data. Since the address of a given property is static, we use the Tiger Line data with the Geo::coder:US perl module and store their lat/long on the server side. For those properties we can't find coords for (usually because the real estate agent is not the brightest of creatures entering their data), we pass it off to google if someone happens to hit it in their search.
This way, on the busiest of our clients' sites (around 25K visitors), we usually only average about 10-15K geocode requests.
And to agree with some other posts.. this has been part of the t&c for quite awhile.. -
Show 51 - 74 of 74 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is