Isn't a couple of views and an appropriate index enough?

El mar, 30-10-2007 a las 16:37 +0900, Delfos, Jacob escribió:
> Hi Jukka,
> 
> When I have the data a bit cleaned up, I'll have a look if I can put
> something together. Currently I'm still in the process of "sifting
> through" :)
> 
> I'm dealing with a lot of MapInfo files with mixed geometries, and I
> want to see if I can get away with being lazy (meaning I don't split up
> tables by geometry).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jacob
> 
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rahkonen Jukka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: 30 October 2007 14:52
> > To: Delfos, Jacob; [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] MapServer and PostGIS GEOMETRY type
> > 
> > Hi Jacob,
> > 
> > Would it be impossible for you to create a couple of such 
> > records and make a controlled trial to see what really happens?
> > 
> > -Jukka Rahkonen-
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: UMN MapServer Users List on behalf of Delfos, Jacob
> > Sent: Tue 30.10.2007 0:53
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] MapServer and PostGIS GEOMETRY type
> >  
> > Hi Jan,
> > 
> > Thanks for your reply. But I still need to find out how MapServer will
> > deal with the records that contain an unexpected geometry 
> > type. I could
> > have a polygon layer pointing to a table which I expect to contain
> > polygons. But if the geometry type of the table is GEOMETRY, then it
> > could contain a line object. What will MapServer do?
> > 
> > If I do an attribute query on such a table, will it return matching
> > records even if the geometry object is a line, though the layer is a
> > polygon layer?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Jacob
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jan Hartmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > Sent: 29 October 2007 20:13
> > > To: Delfos, Jacob
> > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > Subject: Re: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] MapServer and PostGIS 
> > GEOMETRY type
> > > 
> > > Hi Jacob,
> > > 
> > > The Mapfile Reference Manual, chapter Layer says 
> > > (http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/docs/reference/mapfile/layer)
> > > 
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > TYPE [point|line|polygon|circle|annotation|raster|query|chart]
> > > 
> > >      Specifies how the data should be drawn. Need not be the 
> > > same as the 
> > > shapefile type. For example, a polygon shapefile may be drawn 
> > > as a point 
> > > layer, but a point shapefile may not be drawn as a polygon 
> > > layer.Common 
> > > sense rules.
> > > 
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > You probably just have to try it out on your data.
> > > 
> > > Jan
> > > 
> > > Delfos, Jacob wrote:
> > > > Hi List,
> > > > 
> > > > For a particular client I have to translate a lot of 
> > > MapInfo files into 
> > > > PostGIS. Some files may contain some different geometries, 
> > > which ogr2ogr 
> > > > doesn't like. So I force the geometry type to "GEOMETRY" (-nlt 
> > > > GEOMETRY). It translates fine, and seems to draw fine in 
> > > MapServer. But 
> > > > how does MapServer really deal with it?
> > > > 
> > > > If I have a polygon layer, and point it to a PostGIS table 
> > > that contains 
> > > > objects of the type "GEOMETRY", does it simply ignore 
> > > anything that is 
> > > > not a polygon? What about the results of attribute queries? 
> > > Would those 
> > > > be filtered on the geometry type of the layer?
> > > > 
> > > > I can avoid using "GEOMETRY type" by translating the files 
> > > in FME, but 
> > > > I'd prefer to recommend an Open Source solution.
> > > > 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > 
> > > > Jacob
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > *JACOB DELFOS
> > > > GIS ANALYST
> > > > *Maunsell Australia Pty Ltd
> > > > 629 Newcastle Street, Leederville, WA 6007
> > > > PO Box 81, Leederville, WA 6902
> > > > Western Australia
> > > > ABN 20 093 846 925
> > > > 
> > > > Tel     + 61 8 9281 6185
> > > > Fax    + 61 8 9281 6297
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > 
> > > > This email and any attachments are intended solely for the named 
> > > > recipient and are confidential. The copying or distribution 
> > > of them or 
> > > > any information they contain by anyone other than the named 
> > > recipient is 
> > > > prohibited. If you have received this document in error, 
> > > please notify 
> > > > the sender and delete all copies from your computer system 
> > > and destroy 
> > > > all hard copies. It is the recipient's responsibility to 
> > check this 
> > > > email and any attachments to this email for viruses before use.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > This email and any attachments are intended solely for the 
> > named recipient and are confidential. The copying or 
> > distribution of them or any information they contain by 
> > anyone other than the named recipient is prohibited. If you 
> > have received this document in error, please notify the 
> > sender and delete all copies from your computer system and 
> > destroy all hard copies. It is the recipient's responsibility 
> > to check this email and any attachments to this email for 
> > viruses before use.
> > 
> > 
> 
> This email and any attachments are intended solely for the named recipient 
> and are confidential. The copying or distribution of them or any information 
> they contain by anyone other than the named recipient is prohibited. If you 
> have received this document in error, please notify the sender and delete all 
> copies from your computer system and destroy all hard copies. It is the 
> recipient's responsibility to check this email and any attachments to this 
> email for viruses before use.

Reply via email to