[postgis-devel] [PostGIS] #2122: [raster] Real extent feature lost after metadata as views

Mateusz Loskot mateusz at loskot.net
Fri Nov 30 08:54:49 PST 2012

On 30 November 2012 16:43, Bborie Park <dustymugs at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Mateusz Loskot <mateusz at loskot.net> wrote:
>> On 30 November 2012 16:00, Bborie Park <dustymugs at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Sandro Santilli wrote:
>>>> Could that function figure if it's a "regular blocking" table by looking
>>>> at other constraints and encode padding in those constraints ?
>>> Not yet.  There are a few more functions that need to exist before a
>>> "regular blocking" constraint can be added.  Those functions haven't
>>> been written yet due to figuring out how to do some of the testing...
>> My PL/PGSQL fu is lacking and I'm not sure what Sandro means in details,
>> but is it possible to store static constant values within a constraint?
>> If it is possible, then storing the two hard-coded float-point numbers
>> of real spatial extent of the whole raster table coverage would do the trick,
>> and without touching headers of individual rasters in rows.
> We could do that and thus behave like the regular_blocking constraint
> which does no actual constraining.  Though I'd rather just store the
> "true" data extent as a geometry instead of having to compute it from
> numbers.

I agree.

> All this can be done for 2.1.  I don't believe this can be done for
> 2.0 as it would be introducing 3 new constraint management functions
> and modifications to AddRasterConstraints() and
> DropRasterConstraints().

Understood, if that is the closest time possible.
I'm happy to have it in as soon as possible.

As I mentioned, I'm not extremely fluent in PL/PGSQL, but I think with
a bit of guideline I am able to implement it, and I'd like to help.
So, do you need my help with that?
Then I can throw my questions on IRC #postgis

Best regards,
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

More information about the postgis-devel mailing list