<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Just for closure, I already mentioned this to Dan on github ticket. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>This is going to be pushed to PostGIS 2.4 since I think it unlikely we'll have GEOS 3.6 out before 2.3 release (unless strk has other opinions) also not much time for Dan to work out the issues aside from that.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Right now only things we have dependent on GEOS 3.6 besides this is the ST_MinimumClearance and ST_MinimumClearanceLine which as I recall can be used to replace much of our existing ST_MinimumBoundingCircle thus fixing some of issues people have complained about and probably improving speed as well.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Regina<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> postgis-devel [mailto:postgis-devel-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Daniel Baston<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 27, 2016 11:09 AM<br><b>To:</b> PostGIS Development Discussion <postgis-devel@lists.osgeo.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [postgis-devel] PostGIS 2.3 release plans<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Hi Regina,<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>I'm not able to work on the precision model support at the moment. I'd be fine with pushing this off a release. That said, the precision model work stalled when I came across some warts in the exposure of precision models in the GEOS C API. I'm assuming GEOS 3.6 would be released around the same time as PostGIS 2.3, so if we are going to make changes to the GEOS CAPI we'd need to do them before PostGIS 2.3, right? (See <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/2016-March/025714.html">https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/2016-March/025714.html</a>)<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>There are also some simple easy window functions that I think would be nice to add in 2.3 (Average Distance, Sum Distance, etc), but again, I'm not able to work on them right now.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Dan<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 2:11 AM, Regina Obe <<a href="mailto:lr@pcorp.us" target="_blank">lr@pcorp.us</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>I think it's time we start putting a stake in the ground for PostGIS 2.3.<br><br>I would like us to release in mid September, primarily so we don't have to<br>support PostgreSQL 9.6 on PostGIS 2.2. I'm hoping PostgreSQL 9.6 slated<br>release of September will be a little late as usual to buy us more time<br>which I think there is a good chance of given they are at beta2 (and still<br>have at least one rc to go).<br><br>I would also like to call feature freeze by early to mid August. That said,<br>this is what I know we have in works or completed - much self-centered<br>around me cause I know more about what I have to do than what others have to<br>do.<br><br>1) Several functions already in place - our very first set of window<br>functions which I'm pretty excited about and other nice functions like<br>ST_Voronoi, ST_GeneratePoints<br>Plus some performance enhancements<br><br><a href="http://postgis.net/docs/manual-dev/PostGIS_Special_Functions_Index.html#NewFunctions_2_3" target="_blank">http://postgis.net/docs/manual-dev/PostGIS_Special_Functions_Index.html#NewF<br>unctions_2_3</a><br><br>(so nothing to do here except more testing. Some I've already stress tested<br>a bit).<br><br><br>2) More testing on parallelism with PostgreSQL 9.6 (beta2 has a bunch of<br>fixes for parallel support I need to test). Marking costs on more functions.<br>Paul Ramsey already marked off PostGIS geometry/geography functions and Paul<br>Norman provided costs.<br>I marked off raster ones that I think are parallel safe. I still need to<br>stress test and compare with old behavior on real work-loads and make sure<br>no crashing and burning and come up with costs for raster functions.<br><br>-- Things not yet committed but on the horizon slated for PostGIS 2.3 at<br>this point ( 8 pull requests - <a href="https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pulls" target="_blank">https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pulls</a> )<br>3) Making PostGIS non-relocatable and schema qualifying function calls.<br>This I may need help with: As I stated in PostGIS 2.3, we need to schema<br>qualify our function calls primarily because setting search_path on<br>functions breaks inlining behavior needed for functions that utlize spatial<br>indexes and without schema qualification all sorts of things fall apart like<br><br>materialized views, backup / restore , logical decoding replication etc.<br>A good chunk of this was patched with optional helper script released in<br>PostGIS 2.2.2 to set function search_path (but functions that rely on<br>indexes could not be patched)<br><br><br>My proposal is outlined here:<br><br><a href="https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/3496" target="_blank">https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/3496</a><br><br>I could do it all myself if all we had to worry about was building for<br>extensions. To support the old-fashioned way, I may need some help.<br><br>The part I need help with is revising our perl scripts, to take in an extra<br>argument (whether to replace @extschema@. with the default schema specified<br>during configure (if any) or take it out if non-specified.<br><br>So I would change all the functions that call other functions to use<br>@extschema@.<br><br>For extension include, this will be unchanged, since extension plumbing<br>handles replace for that already. For non-extension installs, this would<br>either be<br><br>replace @extschema@. with nothing, or replaced with what a user passes in<br>for PostGIS install location during configure.<br><br>So our perl scripts need to take an additional parameter to denote if they<br>should strip out that, replace it, or do nothing with it. I guess this can<br>be done after the script pass by adding another<br>Step in our generation.<br><br>The extension install can no longer use what was already built for the<br>old-fashioned install since it would have the @extchema@ stripped or<br>hard-coded with some schema and extension script will need this untouched.<br><br>4) Tiger 2016 upgrade for postgis_tiger_geocoder - I expect new Tiger data<br>will be out in August and plan to patch the load scripts to support.<br><br>5) BRIN support -- I think some cleanup is still left with that patch being<br>worked on, but looks pretty close for commit. -<br><a href="https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/106" target="_blank">https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/106</a> So I would consider it a done<br>deal except, it's not in our code base yet. I want this in before<br>mid-August so we can start stress testing it.<br><br>6) Precision Model support - Dan how much more do you have left before you<br>can commit? <a href="https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/100" target="_blank">https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/100</a> (or do we need to<br>push to PostGIS 2.4?)<br>7) ST_Angle function - <a href="https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/97" target="_blank">https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/97</a><br>8) Validity Flag - <a href="https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/99" target="_blank">https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/99</a><br>9) ST_AsText -- adding optional precision argument --<br><a href="https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/94" target="_blank">https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/94</a><br>10) ST_AsGeoBuf -- <a href="https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/108" target="_blank">https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pull/108</a> (still seems<br>a bit to go so may not make an August cut without some loving)<br><br>Feel free to add anything I missed and if I forgot your favorite patch, I'm<br>sorry in advance.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Regina<br><br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>postgis-devel mailing list<br><a href="mailto:postgis-devel@lists.osgeo.org">postgis-devel@lists.osgeo.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>