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

Chris Hodgson chodgson at refractions.net
Tue Jan 3 08:35:27 PST 2012


Thanks bborie, I understand this, but I'm asking more about the 
constraints introduced by the Postgres "extension" mechanism than the 
actual dependencies.

Chris

On 12-01-03 08:29 AM, Bborie Park wrote:
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel




More information about the postgis-devel mailing list