[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: postgis-users
Subject: Re: [postgis-users] pgchip
From: strk () refractions ! net
Date: 2006-05-31 9:08:52
Message-ID: 20060531090852.GC79657 () keybit ! net
[Download RAW message or body]
I'm finally taking a look at pgchip myself, so I can answer
this old mail.
pgchip is "stuffing". Moreover, it's using a "future" field
of the CHIP structure to encode extra information. This
clashes with assumptions present in the canonical input
functions of postgis that prevent storing more info then
barely pixel_size*width*height in the "data" field.
Pgchip is indeed adding palette informations as well.
Generally speaking, a possibility we have to "chipping"
could be similar to what we use for TopoGeometry.
The Raster datatype could be a complex type referring
to a set of relations that contain "tiles" informations.
In this case a CHIP would be a single "tile", possibly
composed by a single raster band.
Operations on such a complex type would be - ehm - complex.
--strk;
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 08:57:33AM -0800, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> Simon Benjamin has added a link <http://simon.benjamin.free.fr/pgchip/
> > to pgchip (we knew someone would do it eventually!) on the wiki
> <http://postgis.refractions.net/support/wiki>.
>
> Simon, one of the fiddlier problems with rasters once you get them
> into the database is random access... for our *only* raster-in-
> database project, we cut the rasters up into small chunks below the
> page size, so that we could quickly pull together the chunks we
> needed. That meant that a single input raster could be exploded into
> thousands of storage chips (hence the type name). Are you chipping
> or stuffing? The trouble with chipping is that it requires a de-
> chipper in order for the stored data to be at all useful (see, raster
> in arcsde, which uses the same trick, and dechips in arcmap or arcims).
>
> P.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic