[postgis-devel] [postgis-users] PSC Vote: Keep or drop Flatgeobuf in PostGIS 3.2.0

[Regina Obe]

Just curious what are your MVT sizes comparable for you deepest tile level.

I was hoping it would be better than Shapefile but guess not always, but good to see it is better than GeoJSON.

 

Thanks,

Regina

 

From: postgis-devel [mailto:postgis-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Rindahl
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2021 7:29 PM
To: PostGIS Development Discussion <postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] [postgis-users] PSC Vote: Keep or drop Flatgeobuf in PostGIS 3.2.0

 

Doing a quick test with the wildfires in CA the past 3 years.

 

Shapefile = 9.42 MB

GeoJSON = 26.5 MB

FlatGeobuf  = 9.42 MB

 

Right now I am serving the fires up via MVT on open layers and will try to add a FlatGeobuf layer for testing.

 

Generated the file via ogr2ogr and will test when postGIS 3.2 is out but it does look like a compact format.  QGIS imports it with no issues.  As an exchange format it will have to be on the command line via ogr2ogr or psql either via GDAL or native postGIS

 

 

On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 9:08 AM Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> > wrote:

As an aside, I appreciate this explanation on speed and benefits, Björn, 
of FlatGeobuf.  Thanks,

-jeff




-- 
Jeff McKenna
GatewayGeo: Developers of MS4W, MapServer Consulting and Training
co-founder of FOSS4G
http://gatewaygeo.com/



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20211215/c392d281/attachment.html>