[postgis-users] Postgis raster : storage performance ?

[Tim-Hinnerk Heuer]

You don't use PostGIS for gaining compression. In fact, PostGIS rasters
probably use more space, but you gain faster access to the files, because
there are spacial indexes and you can do queries a lot easier with
aggregations, overlaying geometries etc, which you cannot do like that or
much harder with GDAL. If you want your rasters to be small you can do
compression, but at the end of the day you want to be able to find out
information from the raster, right?

Cheers,
Tim

Tim-Hinnerk Heuer

Twitter: @geekdenz
Blog: http://www.thheuer.com


On 11 January 2013 23:07, laurent <lcelati at latitude-geosystems.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> 1/ Is there a real advantage to import raster into postgis db in storage
> purposes? Can you give me an indicator evaluating  the gain of file size
> compared to raw raster files?
>
> 2/ Is there a postgis raster tool for compressing raster cover in order to
> compress the size of the dbs?
>
> 3/ Could you explain to me the -R (register) postgis optional parameter ?
> What is the interest of this parameter?
>
>
> Thank you to throw light for me?
>
> Kind regards.
>
> ~IMAGE~
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://postgis.17.n6.nabble.com/Postgis-raster-storage-performance-tp5002222.html
> Sent from the PostGIS - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-users/attachments/20130112/44e3c2de/attachment-0001.html>