"So, if you think direct editing of SDO_GEOMETRY from ArcGIS (a) works
and (b) works well then perhaps you have a case to believe that direct
editing of PostGIS is on the way too."
AFAIK: the answer to a) and b) is both no. You'll always need SDE in
between., if you use SDO_GEOMETRY.
I would love to be proven wrong though in this case :-)
Best regards,
Bart
Paul Ramsey schreef:
On 8-Feb-08, at 1:39 AM, dnrg wrote:
ESRI tells me that, at the ArcGIS Desktop release 9.3,
you'll be able to edit PostGIS data as core
functionality. No SDE required. This will open doors
and minds I hope. Paul, any comments on that?
I'll believe it when I see it. Different elements of the ESRI
marketing apparatus are interpreting the "support PostGIS"
announcement differently. The most believable story I have heard is
that ArcServer (nee SDE) will support a PostGIS geometry type, in much
the same way as it support the Oracle SDO_GEOMETRY type. So, if you
think direct editing of SDO_GEOMETRY from ArcGIS (a) works and (b)
works well then perhaps you have a case to believe that direct editing
of PostGIS is on the way too.
Paul, will PostGIS ever have versioning functionality
for editing workflows similar to ArcSDE? Guess that
would pervert the data, and then PostGIS would "own"
the data in a way like ArcSDE does presently. Still,
many shops find versioning valuable for workflows.
Database lock-in is a fact of life, simple because it is hard to
migrate databases, no matter how open they are. The best versioning
solution I have seen is the Oracle implementation, which does
"workspaces" using the basic MVCC versioning information available
per-tuple. I would love to have that, but frankly it requires a lot
of core PostgreSQL back-end work, and the PgSQL core team doesn't have
workspaces as a high (or even low) priority item.
If we built a versioning system ala ESRI (side tables and references),
we could do a somewhat better job, because it would be in the database
level, not the middle-ware. However, it would have the same
limitations in terms of requiring client software that knew what the
heck to do with the stuff.
"Why not." Explain your use cases that cannot be met any other way.
There are some, but they are dwarfed by other use cases that have
higher priority, in my opinion. I see way more people using PostGIS
for geoprocessing, for example, so a more robust and faster overlay
facility seems like an important thing. Ditto for more core geodetic
support.
P.
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
--
Bart van den Eijnden
OSGIS, Open Source GIS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osgis.nl
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
