Hi Regina,
I tried dropping the geometry cast, it makes no difference. Results below. But
I found another solution which is rather nice...
=
I thought I should redesign this test so that you can check it yourself rather
than take my word for it. Unfortunately I can't share my dataset s
: postgis-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:postgis-users-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Graeme B. Bell
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 4:13 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [postgis-users] selected aligned tiles in pgraster between
several large raster tables.
bborie,
That's extremely interesting! T
bborie,
That's extremely interesting! That's exactly the type of operator I was hoping
to hear about when I wrote my original post.
I expect it will run a little slower than the current approach, because bbox
equality and bbox index lookups are never going to be as fast as an integer
primary
Graeme,
robe2 and I were discussing this thread and we were wondering if using
the ~= operator would work for your problem.
http://www.postgis.net/docs/manual-2.0/ST_Geometry_Same.html
-bborie
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Graeme B. Bell wrote:
>
> Hello bborie (and everyone else).
>
> To r
Hello bborie (and everyone else).
To recap. I'm trying to do some work with 4 gigantic raster tables which have
been set up in the same way (e.g. georeferenced/tiled identically). I want to
compare equivalent tiles in each raster with one another. Each raster has 7
million rows now but I'll b
On 06/12/2013 11:52 AM, Graeme B. Bell wrote:
> Hi again bborie,
>
> "in-db and out-db does matter. Your SQL asks the database to fetch some
> data and the size of said data (and where that data is) will affect the
> performance of the SQL."
>
> I agree that in-DB vs out-DB has a general effect u
Hi again bborie,
"in-db and out-db does matter. Your SQL asks the database to fetch some
data and the size of said data (and where that data is) will affect the
performance of the SQL."
I agree that in-DB vs out-DB has a general effect upon performance depending on
the type of work being done.
On 06/12/2013 11:06 AM, Graeme B. Bell wrote:
>> Have you considered storing your rasters outside the database with
>> raster2pgsql's -R flag? I usually recommend this if the rasters are
>> readonly. This also minimizes the amount of information stored within
>> the database to just the metadata of
> Have you considered storing your rasters outside the database with
> raster2pgsql's -R flag? I usually recommend this if the rasters are
> readonly. This also minimizes the amount of information stored within
> the database to just the metadata of the out-db rasters.
>
> -bborie
Hi bborie,
Tha
Have you considered storing your rasters outside the database with
raster2pgsql's -R flag? I usually recommend this if the rasters are
readonly. This also minimizes the amount of information stored within
the database to just the metadata of the out-db rasters.
-bborie
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 5:2
Hello everyone,
Short version:
I have some identically specified/tiled rasters that differ only in terms of
the data values in the pixels and table name*.
I want to find a quick, easy and 100% trustworthy test of tile position
equivalence between the tiles of several raster tables, so that I
11 matches
Mail list logo
