[mapserver-dev] Call for vote on RFC 65...

[Lime, Steve D (DNR)]

I'll update the RFC. I'm putzing with the serialization functions at the moment and want to get the
committed and then move to the driver changes. The shapefile and SDE drivers won't need much
attention since they won't maintain a result set. SDE could but that hasn't been implemented. SQL
Server will need some attention too. I'm hoping Tamas can help?

Steve

________________________________________
From: Daniel Morissette [dmorissette at mapgears.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 3:21 PM
To: Lime, Steve D (DNR)
Cc: 'MapServer Dev Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [mapserver-dev] Call for vote on RFC 65...

Hi Steve, (and all)

I see that you started working on the addition of a resultindex member
variable instead of reusing tileindex for two purposes.

This would address the OGR issues that I raised in my previous messages,
and I see no other blocker from my point of view. I guess the next step
would be to update the RFC to reflect this change and redo the vote.

Once the RFC is approved, I and Alan should be able to help you with the
implementation in the OGR, Oracle and PostGIS drivers (unless there are
other takers).

Daniel


On 10-12-17 03:06 PM, Lime, Steve D (DNR) wrote:
> Hopefully you guys can ponder it. When I looked at OGR the implementation of getShape and resultGetShape where identical.
>
> Also note that since I propose passing a resultCacheMemberObj around instead of individual id's we could support 3 ids: shape, tile and resultset.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Morissette
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 1:53 PM
> To: Lime, Steve D (DNR)
> Cc: 'MapServer Dev Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [mapserver-dev] Call for vote on RFC 65...
>
> Lime, Steve D (DNR) wrote:
>>
>>    Hi all: I’d like to call for a vote on RFC 65 - Single-pass Query
>>    Changes for 6.0.
>>
>>
>>      http://mapserver.org/development/rfc/ms-rfc-65.html
>>
>
> I wonder if Frank read this RFC or if he missed the thread a couple of
> weeks ago like I did. (Sorry, I've got a big email backlog and the
> initial RFC 65 thread was still in it)
>
> I'm not sure that this is compatible with OGR's current implementation
> to support 5.6's ResultGetShape(). OGR does support both resultsets and
> tileindex, so reusing the tile id may not work in OGR's case (unless we
> go with something like negative tile id that means resultset, and
> positive tileid that means real tileindex id?)
>
>


--
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/