[gdal-dev] Enabling default compression for COG ?

[Daniel Evans]

Another +1 here. As far as I understand, the only real point of the COG
driver is to be a quick way to get some sensible defaults for GeoTIFF
format, and compression is definitely one such sensible default.

Also, the COG spec's example GDAL command includes `-co COMPRESS=LZW`,
which might be another reason why some are surprised that the dedicated COG
driver doesn't do the same.
https://github.com/cogeotiff/cog-spec/blob/master/spec.md

Daniel

On Thu, 30 Sept 2021 at 18:30, Tobias Wendorff <
tobias.wendorff at tu-dortmund.de> wrote:

> I'd give LZW a go. I've got very good experience with that, in terms of
> performance on weaker or embedded systems. However, some people still
> think that the algorithm has a protection by patents.
>
>
> Am 30.09.2021 um 15:46 schrieb Even Rouault:
> > should we enable a default compression scheme for the COG driver ? I've
> > heard people "complaining" about that, or people just not realizing that
> > specifying a compression method was something reasonable to do. Likely a
> > lossless one to be conservative. ZSTD is probably not reasonable as it's
> > too non-standard outside of the GDAL/libtiff world. So the choice would
> > go basically between LZW or DEFLATE. LZW has probably the best
> > compatibility profile (but the less efficient). I guess that most
> > browser based solutions would handle it ? Thoughts ?
> >
> > Even
> >
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20210930/5a19f239/attachment.html>