[postgis-users] ST_Union and 8.3?
robe.dnd at cityofboston.gov
Thu Mar 20 06:37:03 PDT 2008
Can you think of anything wrong with using ST_MemUnion as a temporary
fix aside from the fact that I guess for larger unioning jobs it is
probably less efficient?
Has anyone tried the new 8.3.1 to see if it changes the below issue. I
don't see anything in the list of changes
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/release-8-3-1.html that would
suggest it would, except possibly for
"Fix memory leaks in certain usages of set-returning functions"
I'm planning to try it out in the next day or so.
From: postgis-users-bounces at postgis.refractions.net
[mailto:postgis-users-bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Mark
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:45 AM
To: PostGIS Users Discussion
Subject: Re: [postgis-users] ST_Union and 8.3?
On Wednesday 19 March 2008 14:00:44 Obe, Regina wrote:
> This is a known issue which I think Mark Cave-Ayland is working on.
> I think Mike Leahy had suggested using
> ST_MemUnion as a work around.
> Hope that helps,
My current thinking is that it's related to array access under
Unfortunately my timetable means I will be away with other commitments
the end of the month, so it will have to wait until then. The "quick
would be a temporary downgrade to PostgreSQL 8.2 if you need a more
solution. An early Easter seems to have really messed up the holidays
everyone this year :(
Sirius Corporation - The Open Source Experts
T: +44 870 608 0063
postgis-users mailing list
postgis-users at postgis.refractions.net
The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be
confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure
pursuant to Massachusetts law. It is intended
solely for the addressee. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
More information about the postgis-users