Selon Ari Jolma ari.jo...@gmail.com:
Even,
Another strange thing with GDAL WFS driver. Earlier it did not try to
access the HEAD of a XXX.resolved.gml and now it does:
Here's an excerpt from my server logs. These calls are created by GDAL,
the first is a good GetFeature call, which gets
On 05/21/2013 10:57 AM, Even Rouault wrote:
Selon Ari Jolma ari.jo...@gmail.com:
Even,
Another strange thing with GDAL WFS driver. Earlier it did not try to
access the HEAD of a XXX.resolved.gml and now it does:
Here's an excerpt from my server logs. These calls are created by GDAL,
the
Selon Ari Jolma ari.jo...@gmail.com:
On 05/21/2013 10:57 AM, Even Rouault wrote:
Selon Ari Jolma ari.jo...@gmail.com:
Even,
Another strange thing with GDAL WFS driver. Earlier it did not try to
access the HEAD of a XXX.resolved.gml and now it does:
Here's an excerpt from my
On 05/21/2013 11:38 AM, Even Rouault wrote:
Yes, that's the likely cause and using wfs as the namespace should fix it.
Perhaps the detection of WFS documents could be made more robust, but in the
above case, I'm not sure that GML documents emitted by default by OGR are valid
WFS documents that
(sorry, gdal-dev was accidentally dropped)
On 05/21/2013 12:59 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
Selon Ari Jolma ari.jo...@gmail.com:
On 05/21/2013 11:38 AM, Even Rouault wrote:
Yes, that's the likely cause and using wfs as the namespace should fix it.
Perhaps the detection of WFS documents could be
Hi Frank,
On 21 May 2013 00:02, Frank Warmerdam warmer...@pobox.com wrote:
If you write a small part of an image, GDAL is likely to read a larger
area, update that and write it back. If other programs happen to try and
update the same larger area at the same time some data is likely to be
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Jose Gomez-Dans jgomezd...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Frank,
On 21 May 2013 00:02, Frank Warmerdam warmer...@pobox.com wrote:
If you write a small part of an image, GDAL is likely to read a larger
area, update that and write it back. If other programs happen to
Hello Jean-François,
I now it's late to answer this question. Sorry for that.
You couldn't avoid that query because was raised by the GDAL PostGIS Raster
driver. I'm working on some improvements right now, and that's one of the
improvements actually made. I suggest you to get the last code from
