[mapserver-users] Mapserver and PostgreSQL
vrielink at sarvision.com
Fri Nov 22 10:38:05 EST 2002
Thank you very much. I can say I am convinced now. Especially the future
features look very promising. Think I'll also sunscribe to the Postgis
All others: thanks for your suggestions, they were really helpful.
On Friday 22 November 2002 02:27, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> I hope to convince you more! Firstly, what we have now that native
> PostgreSQL does not have on its own:
> - Real GIS objects (polygons with holes, aggregate types) not toy
> geometric objects
> - The ability to spatially index spatial objects > 8K in size (if you
> think native PostgreSQL types are ready for real GIS, you need to stress
> it a little harder)
> - OpenGIS standards compliance, that means standard function names,
> standard object representations (binary and ascii)
> - Coordinate reprojection support in the database. (Transform() function)
> - Mapserver connector and support from numerous other open source GIS
> applications (GRASS, QGIS, OpenEV, OGR)
> Secondly, what we will soon have which native PostgreSQL will probably
> never bother with:
> - Full robust binary predicate support. Touches(), Contains(), Relate(),
> etc etc etc, all implemented with robust algorithms. More unbreakable
> than commercial GIS databases.
> - Full spatial operators support. Buffer(), Union(), Difference().
> - Multikey indexes combining spatial and non-spatial columns.
> Is PostGIS preferable to shape files? Depends on what your needs are.
> Jan gave a pretty good summary of the kinds of higher level things you
> can do with PostGIS which you cannot do with shape files. When it comes
> to performance, (spatially indexed) shapefiles are unbeatable. When it
> comes to application flexibility, a PostGIS-based application is hard to
More information about the mapserver-users