I've done the break (semi) and then also jumped back in quickly. It is a toss up to what I prefer. I really, really enjoyed DD1 being almost 4 when DD2 was born. DD2 ended up getting seriously ill as a newborn and for 6 months our lives were consumed by basically keeping her alive. DD1 was old enough that I was and did ignore her while dealing with DD2 during that time. If I wanted only two then that would be of been wonderful. I got calculating out the years if I were to have wider spacings and realized that I didn't want to do this forever! I had much mess stress with a baby and an older child, well I would of if DD2 had been well anyway. I don't even want to think about the nightmare it would of been dealing with all the hospital stays if I had a very young child as well.
So DD2 and DS ended up exactly 2y and 6m apart and it was harder. This baby and DS will be 2y 3m apart, and I am dreading it, DS is also delayed so he seems younger then he is. The one nice thing if all my children were younger together is that we would have minimal places to go, I can see the beauty is having a few crazy years with multiple small children and then they are older together. My oldest will be 8.5 when this babe is born, doing the whole school thing with a newborn in tow is rough. I can't ever volunteer, I miss out on so much because I can never attend anything. There is no bus service so twice a day, the school trip is 20 minutes each way, not fun to be doing with a brand new baby. Then with older kids you have all the extra stuff, snowboarding , gymnastics, tapping, on and on. My small kids spent half their life in a waiting room and the other half driving someplace.
Someday I invision being able to help out and actually watch DD1 do white water kayaking for example but that day is many years away, for now I am just wrangling small children and maybe getting to hear about it later.