[postgis-users] [postgis-devel] postgis extension sans raster (only for folks who can't compile with raster support) - PSC Vote and developer/packager comments please

Wed Oct 28 07:06:28 PDT 2015

Losing GDAL would be a step backwards, IMO, but I suppose we've gotten
this far. I've just been hoping to make the SRS handling more magic by
leaning on the OGR SRS stuff a bit, and that's not possible with GDAL
out of the picture. However I guess that's the #1 reason for splitting
raster out. I worry alot about this proposal impossibly complicating
upgrades. PostGIS 3.0?

P.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Vincent Picavet (ml)
<vincent.ml at oslandia.com> wrote:
> Hello Regina,
>
> We do have cases where we do not need raster at all (>90% of our users),
> and must compile everything from scratch (~10% of our users). We would
> be pleased to not having to compile GDAL in this case.
> And it would be great to still use the CREATE EXTENSION mechanism to
> install Postgis, just to be consistent from a user point of view, with
> what can be found in most documentation.
> But I think we could live with a specific SQL loading method for the 10%.
>
> I personally would appreciate to have CREATE EXTENSION postgis; (or
> postgis_core) and CREATE EXTENSION postgis_raster;
> As said, it is then clear from an application point of view which
> dependencies you have, avoid to rely on GDAL if not needed - which can
> be a pain with all its dependencies - and avoid to clutter the function
> lists, memory and all.
>
> But then it is a matter of how much work is required for that from the
> developers, and is there funding to make it work this way.
>
> Vincent
>
> On 27/10/2015 23:49, Paragon Corporation wrote:
>> How many folks are unable to compile postgis with raster or have a
>> package that has no raster support and who REALLY REALLY want to be
>> able to install postgis with:
>>
>> CREATE EXTENSION postgis;
>>
>> This is a repost of a conversation I started in PostGIS -develop
>> which I probably should have cc'd PostGIS users on.  It seems not too
>> many people on dev have issue compiling with GDAL support.
>>
>> The issue discussed is that since postgis raster is part of the
>> postgis extension, if people choose to compile without raster support
>> because they can't get GDAL to work (despite being discouraged), they
>> can not do
>>
>> CREATE EXTENSION postgis;
>>
>> They have to resort to the old way of using postgis contrib scripts
>> to install.
>>
>> My proposition https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/3338
>>
>>
>> was still have a postgis that has raster support (as breaking it out
>> at this point would be  headache particularly for the person who has
>> to deal with the upgrade ramifications) and a big headache for people
>> who use raster heavily as now they'd have two extensions to bother
>> with.
>>
>> That said the proposition in a nutshell is this
>>
>> 1) Still have raster as default and you still need to explicitly ask
>> for --without-raster 2) If you ask for --without-raster, you'll get
>> an extension called  "postgis" with no raster functions in it, but
>> with an extension version number that reads  2.3.0-no-raster
>>
>> So a query like this if you compiled without raster:
>>
>> SELECT  * FROM pg_available_extensions() WHERE name = 'postgis';
>>
>> Would read:
>>
>> name   | default_version |                               comment
>> ---------+-----------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
> postgis | 2.3.0-no-raster     | PostGIS geometry and geography  spatial
> types and functions
>> (1 row)
>>
>> Instead of:
>>
>> name   | default_version |                               comment
>> ---------+-----------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
> postgis | 2.3.0           | PostGIS geometry, geography, and raster
> spatial types and functions
>> (1 row)
>>
>>
>> Which means people who have postgis without raster support can follow
>> the world renowned instructions:
>>
>> CREATE EXTENSION postgis;
>>
>> Like everyone else and all the other postgis extensions
>> postgis_topology, postgis_tiger_geocoder will be built as well.
>>
>> The main downside to this is 1) you have a postgresql postgis
>> extension that may not have any raster functions and one that goes by
>> same extension name postgis with raster support. Though I claim this
>> is clear from the version number and description :) 2) It does mean
>> it’s a bit easier for packager maintainers to package a postgis
>> without raster support which is both good and bad -- good for older
>> systems where an old antiquated gdal is not readily available so they
>> can still package a newer postgis for it. -- bad for users who rely
>> on package maintainers and really want raster support as their
>> package maintainer might just decide not to bother with raster.
>>
>> If there is enough interest, I will reopen the ticket I closed and
>> create and RFC as Paul Ramsey suggested to flesh out the complete
>> details of this and how upgrading would work For folks coming from a
>> postgis without raster non-extension version to a postgis without
>> raster extension version.
>>
>> Thanks, Regina http://www.postgis.us http://postgis.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: postgis-devel
>> [mailto:postgis-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Sandro
>> Santilli Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 5:28 PM To: PostGIS
>> Development Discussion <postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org> Subject: Re:
>> [postgis-devel] postgis extension sans raster (only for folks who
>> can't compile with raster support) - PSC Vote and developer/packager
>> comments please
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 03:39:29PM -0400, Paragon Corporation wrote:
>>> I've retracted.  Seems not enough interest for this and could lead
>>> to confusion.
>>>
>>> Or maybe I should have asked on postgis-users :)
>>
>> That's a good idea. Ask on postgis-users if there's any interest
>> about being able to install postgis with no raster support.
>>
>> --strk; _______________________________________________ postgis-devel
>> mailing list postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ postgis-devel mailing
>> list postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel