[Loadstone] Possibility to ignore Cellid...

Grzegorz Zlotowicz grzezlo at gmail.com
Fri Oct 9 03:19:52 BST 2009


Hi again,
i read a bit more about the gsm system, and the whole thing is a bit more 
complicated - constatations I made before are most probably true for Poland, 
but aren't universal, so sorry for confusion...
1. One lac can be assigned to more than 1 bts.
2. Bts inside and only inside one lac must have unique cellid numbers.
3. In Poland the last digit of cellid designates the sector number, but it 
is not an universal rule.
4. Seems that one bts in most cases must occupy more than one cellid number, 
because of many independent sectors or transceivers, but each operator can 
set up own rules of numbering them.
5. It means, that each lac,cid pair must be indexed independently, making a 
huge overload of data: if one bts contains 3 sectors, and we must index each 
lac/cid independently, the database is 3 times bigger that it could be...
6. Some solution would be to create a table btsnames containing simple id 
and name, and reconstructing the cell table to contain instead of name - a 
reference to btsnames... It would decrease the space of db, but I see it's 
not worth doing at the moment...
7. An other problem is, that some operator can during one night remotely 
change the numbers of each of own bts stations, (rather small probability in 
fact), and then the bts collection becames fiction, but as I said at the 
beginning, such collection is useful...

8. Concluding, at the moment current solution implemented in Loadstone seems 
to be most practical.
So, i'm cancelling my request for modification...


Greetings, GZ. 



More information about the Loadstone mailing list