Hi Rainer,
Tried that, and got the same result.
# SELECT PostGIS_Extensions_Upgrade();
NOTICE: Updating extension postgis 3.4.2
NOTICE: Updating extension postgis_raster 3.4.2
postgis_extensions_upgrade
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upgrade to version 3.4.2 completed, run SELECT postgis_full_version(); for
details
(1 row)
Andreas
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 6:27 PM Rainer Hurling <rhur...@gwdg.de> wrote:
> 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____
> >
>
>
