[postgis-users] ST_<function> vs <function>

[Richard Greenwood]

I'm embarrassed to ask, but what does "ST" stand for?

Rich









On 9/10/07, Obe, Regina <robe.dnd at cityofboston.gov> wrote:
>
>
>
> Steve,
>
> Just to add to what Mark said.  There is a little bit more going on than
> simply a renaming.
>
> Most if not all of the ST relation functions have automatic index use
> enabled in them.
>
> For example
>
> the old within is really closer to the hidden _ST_Within  and the new
> ST_Within function is equivalent to writing the old
>
> geom1 && geom2 AND Within(geom1, geom2)
>
> Same goes for ST_Contains, ST_Overlap etc.
>
> Hope that helps,
> Regina
>
>  ________________________________
>  From: postgis-users-bounces at postgis.refractions.net on
> behalf of Mark Cave-Ayland
> Sent: Sun 9/9/2007 4:30 PM
> To: PostGIS Users Discussion
> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] ST_<function> vs <function>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 16:03 -0400, Stephen Woodbridge wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I seem to have missed reading some vital post or something.
> >
> > What is the difference between ST_<function>() and <function>()?
> > Is this just a renaming for namespace issues?
> > Are the <function>() names deprecated?
> > Are there other benefits to this renaming?
> >
> > Please explain or point me to the relevant docs.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >    -Steve
>
>
> Hi Stephen,
>
> I don't remember there being much discussion about this, but the
> relevant commit can be found here:
> http://postgis.refractions.net/pipermail/postgis-commits/2007-June/000074.html.
> In short, the old function names are deprecated, and new applications should
> start to use the ST_ prefix functions instead.
>
>
> ATB,
>
> Mark.
>
> --
> ILande - Open Source Consultancy
> http://www.ilande.co.uk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>
>  The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be
> confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure pursuant to
> Massachusetts law. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you received
> this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
> computer.
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>
>


-- 
Richard Greenwood
richard.greenwood at gmail.com
www.greenwoodmap.com