OK, ugly query in a different way:
select pd.* from pandatestdata pd,
where pd.id not in (select p.id
from pandatestdata p, world2_12nm w
where st_contains(w.the_geom, p.the_geom));
I like Regina's best though, elegance personified.
P
On 24-Oct-07, at 4:01 PM, Richard Heimann [C] wrote:
Again, thank you both Paul and Regina…
Regina, perhaps you can explain the LEFT JOIN. Nevertheless, it
works with one disclaimer. I am left with the following message,
perhaps you can demystify it?
“NOTICE: LWGEOM_gist_joinsel called with incorrect join type
Query returned successfully with no result in 812 ms.”
Paul, I also received a message from your sql though that was abit
more inauspicious. I attempted to hack your sql though
unsuccessfully. The first step is obvious; you are selecting all
points that are not completely contained within country boundaries.
And although the first query provides a list of all IDs it will not
tell if the rest have the correct ids assigned to them. So, maybe
the second query performs a data integrity check? Message below.
Also, strangely, the output was a polygon feature.
“row number -1 is out of range 0..-1
Total query runtime: 703 ms.
0 rows retrieved.”
Rich
From: Obe, Regina [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 5:23 PM
To: PostGIS Users Discussion; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: PostGIS Users Discussion
Subject: RE: [postgis-users] ST_Difference
Oops even easier
SELECT pd.*
FROM pandatestdata p LEFT JOIN world2_12nm w On st_contains
(w.the_geom, p.the_geom)
WHERE w.id IS NULL
Here I am assuing w.id is the id of world2_12nm
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of
Paul Ramsey
Sent: Wed 10/24/2007 5:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'PostGIS Users Discussion'
Subject: Re: [postgis-users] ST_Difference
Oh, yeah, oops, I know. It's the join logic, its finding the things
not contained for each world feature, not for the full world set.
select pd.* from pandatestdata pd,
(select p.id
from pandatestdata p, world2_12nm w
where st_contains(w.the_geom, p.the_geom)) as wd where pd.id <> wd.id;
Ugly, but probably effective: find all the things contained, then
just strip those out.
The trouble is that disjointness is not an easily spatially indexable
operation. If you're going to take this into operation with large
data volumes, a more effective data set would be ocean polygons, cut
up into smallish regular grid squares, then you can test containment
with relatively good index selectivity.
P.
On 24-Oct-07, at 1:53 PM, Richard Heimann [C] wrote:
> Thanks Paul for the response. I hadn’t thought of this logic, it
> didn’t work
> however. Strangely, it increased the number of features by eight
> times. Any
> thoughts?
>
> Vr
> Rich
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Ramsey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 4:07 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; PostGIS Users Discussion
> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] ST_Difference
>
> select p.*
> from pandatestdata p, world2_12nm w
> where not st_contains(w.the_geom, p.the_geom);
>
> On 24-Oct-07, at 11:45 AM, Richard Heimann [C] wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your response W. I should have posted the sql query
>> earlier.
>> Anyway...its below.
>>
>> My goal is to drop all features (points) that fall within my
>> polygon. In
>> this case, I have ship track data and want to filter it with world
>> country
>> buffers.
>>
>> World2_12nm - my world country 12nm buffered polygon
>> Pandatestdata - track data (point)
>> Panda_diff2 - new table
>>
>>
>> CREATE TABLE panda_diff2 AS
>> SELECT AsText(Difference(world2_12nm.the_geom,
>> pandatestdata.the_geom)) FROM
>> world2_12nm, pandatestdata
>>
>> Also attached are the astext versions of my data as well as a csv
>> of the
>> output from the above sql. Please debunk the mystery...
>>
>> Thanks again
>> Rich
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Webb Sprague [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 12:00 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; PostGIS Users Discussion
>> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] ST_Difference
>>
>> You might get more useful help if you post an "astext()" version of
>> your data, the query, the result, and a *desired* result.
>>
>> I know the difference functions can be tricky and are sometiimes
>> defined in ways you might not expect.
>>
>> Thx
>> W
>>
>> On 10/24/07, Richard Heimann [C] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would appreciate help in constructing an SQL statement that
>>> performs a
>>> difference function on two datasets. My intersect function
works but
>> cannot
>>> work out the kinks with st_difference. Thanks for your help.Im
>>> new to
>>> Postgis.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rich
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> postgis-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> postgis-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>
> <panda_diff2.csv>
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be
confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure
pursuant to Massachusetts law. It is intended solely for the
addressee. If you received this in error, please contact the sender
and delete the material from any computer.
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
