* Paragon Corporation (l...@pcorp.us) wrote:
I would almost go with forcing everyone to change their existing tables to
typmod if they want to reap the benefits of PostGIS 2.0,
but most of my clients will not go to 2.0 then.
What I havn't heard yet is any explanation or description of *why*
Steve,
* Paragon Corporation (l...@pcorp.us) wrote:
I would almost go with forcing everyone to change their existing
tables to typmod if they want to reap the benefits of PostGIS 2.0, but
most of my clients will not go to 2.0 then.
What I havn't heard yet is any explanation or description
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 03:15:26AM -0400, Paragon Corporation wrote:
One other note -- the SQL/MM standard calls for an st_geometry_columns view
which is a true view that reads the system catalogs and should only read the
system catalogs I think.
geometry_columns is a left over from OGC
All,
* Sandro Santilli (s...@keybit.net) wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 03:15:26AM -0400, Paragon Corporation wrote:
So that is why I was proposing a hybrid -- geometry_columns -- so new
PostGIS can work with older tools
Having a hybrid may work for backwards-compatibility reasons, but we
In my mind, the *only* reason I'm spending the time to implement
typmod is to turn geometry_columns into a view. If I'm not getting
that, it's not worth spending the time. The whole point, for me, is
that I can CREATE TABLE and boom my data shows up. There should not be
any required manual steps
Subject: Re: [postgis-users] [postgis-devel] how to keep geometry_columns in
sync wit tablesand views (and new PostGIS 2.0 plans)
In my mind, the *only* reason I'm spending the time to implement typmod is
to turn geometry_columns into a view. If I'm not getting that, it's not
worth spending
