[postgis-devel] Found possible platform-specific bug in PostGIS 1.4.0 ?

Nathan Widmyer lighthousej at gmail.com
Fri Sep 11 07:06:45 PDT 2009


Mark,

I did not mention it, but I did include the "select postgis_full_version();"
output in both cases in the initial attachment, but I did not include the
"select version();" results.

Here they are now...

For windows:
postgres=# select version();
                           version
-------------------------------------------------------------
 PostgreSQL 8.4.0, compiled by Visual C++ build 1400, 32-bit
(1 row)


For Linux:
postgres=# select version();

version
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 PostgreSQL 8.4.0 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC) 3.4.6
20060404 (Red Hat 3.4.6-10), 32-bit
(1 row)


Thank you,
Nathan


On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Mark Cave-Ayland <
mark.cave-ayland at siriusit.co.uk> wrote:

> Nathan Widmyer wrote:
>
>  Attached are two psql sessions, one on a WinXP Pro SP3 machine, another to
>> Ubuntu Hardy 8.04.  (one pair of files have unix line endings, another has
>> DOS line endings, for your convenience).
>>
>> There are 18 polygons in the data set and I want to make a union out of
>> them.  The union works in Linux but fails with an exception in Windows.
>>
>> I received an error on the Windows box (TopologyException: found non-noded
>> intersection ...), then brought the data over to the linux box for analysis,
>> and curiously the operation worked.
>>
>> If you visualize it, I think the last polygon (#18) shares a common line
>> segment in space with another (possibly #15), but breaks where #18 has a
>> vertex on the line of #15.
>> However there are at least 2 polygons that cover the same point in space
>> so the point shouldn't even be a problem because it's not on the outside of
>> the resulting shape.
>>
>> I'm sure my analysis is lacking, but wanted to communicate all I found
>> out.
>> Using an alternate strategy of linework does get the union shape though.
>>
>>
>> Nathan
>>
>
> Hi Nathan,
>
> Thanks for the analysis and test case. One of the key bits of information
> you forgot to include though was the version of PostGIS and PostgreSQL being
> used on each box. Can you post the output of the following on both boxes:
>
> SELECT version();
> SELECT postgis_full_version();
>
>
> ATB,
>
> Mark.
>
> --
> Mark Cave-Ayland - Senior Technical Architect
> PostgreSQL - PostGIS
> Sirius Corporation plc - control through freedom
> http://www.siriusit.co.uk
> t: +44 870 608 0063
>
> Sirius Labs: http://www.siriusit.co.uk/labs
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20090911/7922d7d1/attachment.html>


More information about the postgis-devel mailing list