[postgis-devel] RE: WKTRaster news from the Toronto CodeSprint?

[Frank Warmerdam]

Stephen Frost wrote:
> Mateusz,
> 
> * Mateusz Loskot (Mateusz.Loskot at cadcorp.com) wrote:
>>> That would be much nicer than having yet another table in the public
>>> schema that doesn't really belong.  I hope to do the same for the
>>> geometry_column some day..
>> If you present OGC guys with good reasons, perhaps it will happen one day.
> 
> There appears to be some confusion here.  geometry_columns would become
> a view instead of something which has to be updated through a complex
> set of magic functions that do things they really shouldn't (like add
> columns to tables).  This would be for PostGIS, and of course we
> wouldn't break the OGC spec requirements.  I don't mind the
> raster_columns table from a specification standpoint, but from an
> implementation perspective (I got the impression you were handling both)
> that setup is just plain horrible.

Stephen,

Could you expand a bit on the "horrible" aspect?  Is the problem
that RASTER_COLUMNS cannot practically be turned into a view?  That it
is in the public schema?  That it will be hard to update appropriately?

I've personally given up on the "making it a view" aspect, but there
may be ways of mitigating other negative aspects of it.  I am just
not clear on what the issue(s) are.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent