Opened 13 years ago

Closed 12 years ago

#658 closed task (fixed)

LWGEOM Update on PostGIS 2.0

Reported by: colivier Owned by: colivier
Priority: medium Milestone: PostGIS 2.0.0
Component: postgis Version: master
Keywords: LWGEOM update Cc:


The detail on the struct update is documented here:

The implementation will take 2 steps: 1) Update LWGEOM struct 2) Update serialization too

Attachments (1)

DIFF_658 (199.5 KB ) - added by colivier 13 years ago.
Diff against r6158

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (10)

by colivier, 13 years ago

Attachment: DIFF_658 added

Diff against r6158

comment:1 by colivier, 13 years ago

Attached a patch related to the first step implementation, If no one complain about it, i plan to process to commit next week

comment:2 by pramsey, 13 years ago

Go for it. I have a pile of changes in my sandbox right now also, and am building up more, since I've changed the behavior of some core pointarray functions, which has in turn forced me into re-writing all the functions that directly alter the serialized_pointlist so that they work via the ptarray API instead. Should be done by the end of next week, assuming my other contract work doesn't interfere too much.

comment:3 by pramsey, 13 years ago

I'm guessing the code base has changed enough now to invalidate this patch. Olivier, I'm tossing big changes through pretty regularly now. In order to avoid stomping on each other, I can arrange a period of a couple days where I won't make big changes and you can complete and apply the patch. The alternative is either you or I getting stuck with a big sandbox of changes that won't merge with trunk.

comment:4 by colivier, 13 years ago

Yeap Paul, as i retrieve the latest trunk yesterday evening, lot of things changed… And i will need to take time to merge and test it again.

If i could have this full Week End time frame to do so, it should be Ok.

comment:5 by colivier, 13 years ago

First part is commited as r6180

comment:6 by pramsey, 13 years ago

Any chance you could change POINTARRAY.dims to POINTARRAY.flags and associated TYPE_ calls to FLAGS_ calls? Is that in the plan?

comment:7 by colivier, 13 years ago

For POINTARRAY.flags it could be. Do you see other things to do at the same time ?

I already have listed:


TYPE_NDIMS should already have been switched to FLAGS_NDIMS, if not it's an omission.

comment:8 by strk, 12 years ago

Is there still work to do on this ticket ? Last comment is from over one year ago.

comment:9 by strk, 12 years ago

Resolution: fixed
Status: newclosed

Assuming all done here…

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.