[postgis-devel] [PostGIS] #2122: [raster] Real extent feature lost after metadata as views
dustymugs at gmail.com
Fri Nov 30 08:24:07 PST 2012
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Sandro Santilli <strk at keybit.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 08:07:57AM -0800, Bborie Park wrote:
>> > Couldn't (or doesn't) a constraint contain the original extent ?
>> > The same information that you would have put into the raster_column field.
>> It could be done as a constraint... a constraint that does not enforce
>> anything. The problem with constraints that don't enforce anything is
>> that they're static and may go out of date...
> It could also constraint: all raster tiles must be covered bu that extent.
>> There are a whole set of constraints present...
> ^^^ so there's one already ?
Yes. This is a constraint enforcing that all tiles are within the
maximum extent for the table. A "true" data extent constraint would be
something else though that would be hard to enforce due to probable
>> number of bands
>> pixel type of each band
>> in-db/out-db of each band
>> The proposed addition of attributes is the correct solution but when
>> can we implement said solution? Can we take advantage of the
>> "version" variable in the serialized raster to make a change,
>> particularly if we maintain support for prior versions?
> You mean the change in the serialized value ? Really ?
> 16*2 bits enforced on all values for a "corner" case ?
You're correct to question whether or not this is even worth making a
serialized format change. I'd much rather see a format change for
You can minimize (or in some cases eliminate) the amount of padding
that is done by wisely using tile sizes that leave little or no
remainder (raster width / tile width or raster height / tile height).
More information about the postgis-devel