On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 14:18 -0500, Gerry Creager wrote: > Brad Douglas wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 19:18 -0500, Jason Winningham wrote: > >> On Oct 4, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Tate Belden wrote: > >> > >>> Is that even possible? To standardize on a generic 'SQL' so a > >>> specific set of features offered by any one SQL server don't > >>> dictate that server and only that server can be used? > >> I seem to recall that postgres has some specific GIS-type extensions > >> (PostGIS?) that would be desirable for an xastir implementation. > > > > Yes, PostGIS has spatial extensions, but I believe requiring the user > > have a full-blown database is excessive. I use it myself, but it > > shouldn't be forced onto anyone. > > > > SQLite should suffice in parsing DBase files of reasonable size. > > And with SQLite, you lose the capability of letting the database do the > heavy lifting for geospatial queries. A PostGIS implementation is not > too hard, and a default schema is straightforward.
Make larger databases optional, not a requirement. -- 73, de Brad KB8UYR/6 <rez touchofmadness com> _______________________________________________ Xastir mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
