[postgis-devel] Making SFCGAL mandatory

[Regina Obe]

Not following how that helps getting rid of SFCGAL from the postgis library itself.  The GUC thing doesn't bother me that much and will annoy me even less when 3.0 comes out since we will not have two backends coexisting during upgrade for the life of PostGIS 3 major.

 

It's the fact it's part of postgis library and not a separate library like rtpostgis or postgis_topology that bugs me.

 

Because for packaging you can never cleanly with one compile a separate package for postgis_sfcgal that depends on postgis  and a package for just postgis.

Your postgis package will always be infected with postgis_sfcgal if it were ever to be used as a dependency in the postgis_sfcgal package.

 

From: postgis-devel [mailto:postgis-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Darafei "Kom?pa" Praliaskouski
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2018 7:25 AM
To: PostGIS Development Discussion <postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] Making SFCGAL mandatory

 

 

сб, 17 нояб. 2018 г. в 11:23, Regina Obe <lr at pcorp.us <mailto:lr at pcorp.us> >:

>  How about we just overload ST_Intesects, ST_3DIntersects and so forth.  We love overloading ☺
>  And then get rid of the backend.

>  So anyone who wants to use the cgal version would do

> ST_Intersects(geom1,geom2, 'cgal')

Disregard my proposed solution here of overloading the functions.  I just realized that wouldn't solve the ultimate gripe I had of SFCGAL being part of the postgis lib.
It would only give more granular control of when to use SFCGAL/PostGIS overlapping functions than Backend GUC does.

 

What if we treat it all just like GEOS version test?

i.e. there is always a function from SFCGAL, and if PostGIS is compiled without it it just says "please recompile", and if there is we're lucky and it just works. 

Regarding solid and non-solid intersection - what if they are indeed two distinct operations, just like ST_Contains and ST_Intersects that mean basically the same thing for point-and-polygon, but start differing with higher dimensions? Maybe we can find two different words for solid intersection and non-solid intersection operations, and then one of them will be GEOS and another CGAL?

 

-- 

Darafei Praliaskouski
Support me: http://patreon.com/komzpa

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20181122/8c41e8d2/attachment.html>