That is not the answer your are waiting for but...

IMHO, once you overcome the mythical concept that a database server will always 
perform slower than a direct file access then "Spatial is not special anymore!" 
[who said that?] and you can think on the benefits just like a banker or an 
accounting bureau. Database servers in general are capable of making a good use 
of the available resources. For raster what is needed is a good BLOB support 
with cursor preferably. Spatial extension and schemas are indispensable 
accessories, they should provide metadata, georeferences definition, spatial 
indexation, etc. but they should not drag down the performance.

Just my two cents.


>  -------Original Message-------
>  From: Paul Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Raster data on RDBMS
>  Sent: Oct 31 '08 02:11
>  On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Gilberto Camara
>  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > but the benefits of having
>  > raster data on a DBMS are much more important.
>  And those benefits are....?
>  _______________________________________________
>  Discuss mailing list
Discuss mailing list

Reply via email to