[postgis-users] ST_AsRaster vs raster2pgsql

[georgew]

Thank you Pierre, after adding constraints I get:

"NZTPU";"public";"bk30_saga";"rast";2193;5;-5;4801;5784;TRUE;FALSE;1;"{32BF}";"{-99999}";"{f}";"010300002091080000010000000500000000000080DD0F3A41CECF067D3C72554100000080A26D3A41CECF067D3C72554100000080A26D3A41CECF067DFE55554100000080DD0F3A41CECF067DFE55554100000080DD0F3A41CECF067D3C725541"

"NZTPU";"public";"bk30_dem2";"rast";2193;5;-5;4800;5783;TRUE;FALSE;1;"{8BUI}";"{0}";"{f}";"010300002091080000010000000500000000000000E00F3A41000000003C72554100000000A06D3A41000000003C72554100000000A06D3A4100000040FF55554100000000E00F3A4100000040FF55554100000000E00F3A41000000003C725541"

much better! but not identical. The blocksize is slightly different, the
pixel type and no_data value are different and the  extent geometry is also
slightly different, I assume all due to the pixel type being generated
differently. Using st_metadata and st_bandmetadata I get:

"(1707997.5,5622001.95354076,4801,5784,5,-5,0,0,2193,1)";"(32BF,-99999,f,)"    
saga
"(1708000,5622000,4800,5783,5,-5,0,0,2193,1)";"(8BUI,0,f,)"	                      
dem2

Any suggestions as to what I can do to make them identical?



--
View this message in context: http://postgis.17.x6.nabble.com/ST-AsRaster-vs-raster2pgsql-tp5005827p5005830.html
Sent from the PostGIS - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.