Am 19.12.2024 um 10:09 schrieb Andreas B:
I checked the extent of the tiles, and 'NHS-D0309_50M_E25833.tif' has a
different extent that is incompatible with the other tiles.
All the other tifs are lined up with coordinates ending in 00, 25, 50 and 75;
'NHS-D0309_50M_E25833.tif' does not.
This explains the not aligned-stuff, and if I remove that tile, no misalignment
notices are given.
This does not solve my problem regarding the data looking strange in QGIS,
unfortunately. I still get an image like the one in merge_raster2pgsql.png.
I also tried with a (more) recent version of PostgreSQL/PostGIS and
raster2pgsql, but the issue is still there:
# SELECT version();
PostgreSQL 16.3 [..]
# SELECT PostGIS_full_version();
POSTGIS="3.4.2 POSTGIS_REVISION" [EXTENSION] (liblwgeom version mismatch: "3.4.2 c19ce56")
PGSQL="160" GEOS="3.13.0-CAPI-1.19.0" (compiled against GEOS 3.12.2) PROJ="9.5.1
NETWORK_ENABLED=OFF URL_ENDPOINT=https://cdn.proj.org <https://cdn.proj.org/>
USER_WRITABLE_DIRECTORY=/var/lib/postgres/.local/share/proj
DATABASE_PATH=/usr/share/proj/proj.db" GDAL="GDAL 3.10.0, r
eleased 2024/11/01" LIBXML="2.13.5" LIBJSON="0.18" LIBPROTOBUF="1.5.0" WAGYU="0.5.0
(Internal)" (core procs from "3.4.2 c19ce56" need upgrade) RASTER (raster procs from "3.4
.2 c19ce56" need upgrade)
Maybe that I missed something here. But did you try
SELECT PostGIS_Extensions_Upgrade();
before using the database with your new combo of PostgreSQL/PostGIS and
raster2pgsql?
HTH,
Rainer
$ raster2pgsql
RELEASE: 3.4.2 GDAL_VERSION=310 (POSTGIS_REVISION)
Another observation is that the choice of tile size varies (I'm using -t auto):
With vrt as input, always uses 128x128:
INFO: Using computed tile size: 128x128
With *.tif as input the tile size varies depending on which tile is processed
first, e.g.:
INFO: Using computed tile size: 215x274
or
INFO: Using computed tile size: 97x46
or
INFO: Using computed tile size: 18x10
Just testing and thinking out loud!
Best,
Andreas
On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 12:35 AM Regina Obe <l...@pcorp.us
<mailto:l...@pcorp.us>> wrote:
Sorry haven’t had a chance to look thru this yet. Going to be tied up for
the next two weeks so I might not get a chance until much later.____
__ __
If any others are interested in investigating, please don’t wait for me.____
__ __
Thanks,____
Regina____
__ __
*From:*Andreas B <pan...@gmail.com <mailto:pan...@gmail.com>>
*Sent:* Friday, December 13, 2024 6:48 AM
*To:* postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org>
*Subject:* Re: Importing tiles with raster2pgsql____
__ __
Regina,____
__ __
I'm linking to a folder with a zip containing a subset of tiles that
demonstrates my problem, a script to run the commands, and two screenshots.
Note that I'm a PostGIS beginner, so it's possible I'm doing something
wrong!____
The issues encountered differs a bit from what I described yesterday, but
the essence is the same.____
__ __
Link to folder:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/bk8cwktahry0oj0ab2rsz/AHdTD73unb4Efxtgf7exfm0?rlkey=esjtw2iyzysan2hdqklwmj5e3&st=hupv5tsr&dl=0
<https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/bk8cwktahry0oj0ab2rsz/AHdTD73unb4Efxtgf7exfm0?rlkey=esjtw2iyzysan2hdqklwmj5e3&st=hupv5tsr&dl=0>____
__ __
Best,____
Andreas____
__ __
On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 3:26 PM Regina Obe <l...@pcorp.us
<mailto:l...@pcorp.us>> wrote:____
Andreas,____
____
Yes I would expect them to give the same result.____
____
What version of raster2pgsql are you running? It should tell you if
you run raster2pgsql without any args.____
____
Also what platform are you on? Any chance you have some of those tiles
available so we can check it out?____
____
*From:*Andreas B <pan...@gmail.com <mailto:pan...@gmail.com>>
*Sent:* Thursday, December 12, 2024 6:17 AM
*To:* postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org
<mailto:postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org>
*Subject:* Importing tiles with raster2pgsql____
____
Hi all,
I have a dataset with several hundred tiles (GeoTIFFs) that make up a
digital terrain model.
Each tile is 0.5d x 0.5d.
I tried to load these GeoTIFFs to PostGIS with:
$ raster2pgsql -s 32631 -I -M -F -C -t auto -d -l 2,4,8,16,32 tif/*.tif
(1)
The data was loaded, but when viewing in QGIS, it looked like jagged
lines with areas of white overlain by pieces of neighboring tiles, etc.
This didn't look right.
I also noticed that for each tif, the constraints were printed.
I expected this to be done once, after the last tile was loaded.
I then created a virtual raster with gdalbuildvrt:
$ gdalbuildvrt merge.vrt tif/*.tif (2)
And then used raster2pgsql to load in the vrt:
$ raster2pgsql -s 32631 -I -M -F -C -t auto -d -l 2,4,8,16,32 merge.vrt
| psql (3)
The data was loaded, and looked good in QGIS.
Shouldn't commands (1) and (3) give the same results, or am I
misunderstanding?
Best, Andreas____
