[postgis-devel] Vote on Merging postgis and raster installs andwhen

[Bborie Park]

Yes.  Nothing in geometry and geography depends on or is affected by
the raster component.  The raster component does call a few lwgeom
functions though.  So, you would not need to do a dump/restore if you
were looking to add raster support to an existing PostGIS system.

-bborie

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Chris Hodgson <chodgson at refractions.net> wrote:
> If I (or my packager) compile postgis without raster support, and I install
> it and have data in it, can I add raster support to it later - without
> dumping all my data? I think I can with a separate postgis-raster extension.
> Is it possible with everything in one extension? Might be a useful case to
> support... I can see the case for monolithic packaging as well though.
>
> Chris
>
>
> On 12-01-02 09:06 AM, Paragon Corporation wrote:
>>
>> strk,
>>
>> I'm fine with raster and topology being dis-abable, but I think the
>> default
>> should be they are automatically installed and you have to do an explicit
>> w/out to not get them.  Since topology is in its own
>> schema -- it has to be a separate extension.  For raster -- I need to know
>> if people feel this should stay separated as like I said --
>> that means I have to break it back out as its own extension.
>>
>> For topology there is no extra dependency (except possibly for it needing
>> GEOS 3.3 or higher, but like I said I think its pretty stupid we don't
>> require GEOS 3.3 for PostGIS 2.0.0 or at least have a glaring wanrning you
>> need to do a w-out 3.3 to get past). So there really is no excuse for it
>> not
>> being turned on by default.
>>
>> I don't think packagers necessarily leave these things out or use lower
>> versions that don't have all features enabled, I think we put them in that
>> trap
>> by not warning them they are missing things. After all they package for a
>> lot of things not jsut PostGIS and I know as a packager its hard. As a
>> PostGIS user things being left out really frustrates me which is one
>> reason
>> I can see why some windows users are afraid of using Linux.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Regina
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net
>>> [mailto:postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On
>>> Behalf Of Paragon Corporation
>>> Sent: Monday, January 02, 2012 11:38 AM
>>> To: 'PostGIS Development Discussion'
>>> Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] Vote on Merging postgis and
>>> raster installs andwhen
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm not a big fan of monolithic systems.
>>>
>>> I am -- I hate stuff I can't count on not being there
>>> especially if I don't have the ability to compile my own.
>>> E.g. it drives me nuts when the packager decides to package
>>> an antiquated GEOS and half the things I need are disabled as
>>> a result. The same I see with raster.
>>>
>>>> What's the rationale for forcing anyone who only needs
>>>
>>> vectors to also
>>>>
>>>> have support for rasters ?
>>>>
>>>  Even for projects I won't really need core raster for, I
>>> plan to use it for in the database reporting -- e.g.
>>> outputting geometries in my report writer without need for
>>> extra mapping software.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Seems more of a packaging issue to me, and I see packagers
>>>
>>> usually do
>>>>
>>>> more splitting than upstream (breaking packages in -core, -dev,
>>>> -utils, -doc, ...)
>>>
>>> Well - I need to know now.  Because when I had raster as a
>>> separate extension, I distinctly remember Paul saying -- "Why
>>> don't you have it as part of postgis extension?"
>>>
>>> So I merged them.  I can't have some postgis 2.0.0 extensions
>>> having raster support and some not. Since an extension is
>>> more than packaging.  It means -- these are the functions you
>>> have -- no pick and choose.  If it is then it has to be a
>>> separate extension.
>>>
>>> For PostGIS 2.0.0 -- raster is a big piece of it.  It would
>>> be a shame for people to not get vector support just because
>>> their package manager felt they didn't need it.  Trust me
>>> there will be some of those and it will be the same annoying
>>> issue I have to deal with when I have to compile my own
>>> PostGIS  because the packager decided I didn't need all my
>>> functions and gave  me a half-assed version of GEOS.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> REgina
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> postgis-devel mailing list
>>> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
>>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> postgis-devel mailing list
>> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel