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

[Stephen Frost]

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.

> Anyway, discussions about it belong to the world of Sci-Fi, IMHO.

This was discussed quite a bit previously on this list.  The only
possible issue is if there is too much information to be encoded in the
32-bit integer that PostgreSQL currently provides for typmod.  Based on
the prior discussion on this list, it looked like it would be possible
to do for the geometry_columns data.

	Thanks,

		Stephen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20090313/b2b0cd69/attachment.sig>