1.9.1 - yes, I saw your discussion about GDAL problems.  Maybe the rounding bug 
has something to do with it, but even when no bounding box is used from GDAL 
(like when I just want to query what the extent is of the whole raster), I get 
the wrong extents and horrible performance.

I'd like to at least verify that the PostGIS raster is OK first.  GDAL dev is 
not really a good option since I need to deploy the extraction scripts on a few 
computers very soon, and it's best if I can use a packaged distribution.

The vrt of the original geotiffs works, so that's what I'll probably be using.

On Aug 23, 2012, at 1:37 PM, Bborie Park wrote:

> What version of GDAL are you using?  Could you try GDAL trunk?  I don't
> trust anything other than trunk (1.9.x or below) due to various bugs.
> At some point, I'll dig into the PostGIS raster driver...
> 
> -bborie
> 
> On 08/23/2012 07:01 AM, William Kyngesburye wrote:
>> almost forgot: PostGIS 2.0.1, on PG 9.1.4.  PPC OS X.
>> 
>> On Aug 23, 2012, at 8:46 AM, William Kyngesburye wrote:
>> 
>>> I created a raster table for a large area of DEM data, with index and 
>>> constraints, no overviews.  When I run gdalinfo on the table, it takes 
>>> about 15m to query to get the extents, which are then wrong.
>>> 
>>> Original 32bit float geotiffs = 27GiB (uncompressed), 84W, 36N to 71W, 
>>> 45.5N (not complete coverage)
>>> 
>>> In PostGIS = 25GiB, 74W, 33.5N to 61W, 43N
>>> 
>>> There are 15936 records in the table, which matches the number of input 
>>> TIFFs and the tile size I used (actually 22 more than the input), so it 
>>> looks like all the data was imported.
>>> 
>>> It looks like the data was shifted 10 deg east and 2.5 deg south.
>>> 
>>> When I try to extract a region from that with gdal_translate, it takes the 
>>> 15m to check the extants again, then extracts garbage.
>>> 
>>> I'm just getting started with PG rasters and don't know enough about the 
>>> SQL needed to check within PG if everything is OK there or not (extents, 
>>> extract some data to tif) or if it's a GDAL problem.
>>> 
>>> A GDAL vrt of the geotiffs processes quickly and reports the correct 
>>> extents.
>>> 
>>> -----
>>> William Kyngesburye <kyngchaos*at*kyngchaos*dot*com>
>>> http://www.kyngchaos.com/
>>> 
>>> "Time is an illusion - lunchtime doubly so."
>>> 
>>> - Ford Prefect
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> postgis-users mailing list
>>> postgis-users@postgis.refractions.net
>>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>> 
>> -----
>> William Kyngesburye <kyngchaos*at*kyngchaos*dot*com>
>> http://www.kyngchaos.com/
>> 
>> "I ache, therefore I am.  Or in my case - I am, therefore I ache."
>> 
>> - Marvin
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> postgis-users mailing list
>> postgis-users@postgis.refractions.net
>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Bborie Park
> Programmer
> Center for Vectorborne Diseases
> UC Davis
> 530-752-8380
> bkp...@ucdavis.edu
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-users mailing list
> postgis-users@postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users

-----
William Kyngesburye <kyngchaos*at*kyngchaos*dot*com>
http://www.kyngchaos.com/

All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.


_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
postgis-users@postgis.refractions.net
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users

Reply via email to