hello when I enter this command: select count(*) from shey6 as a,sel10p4 as b where contains(a.wkb_geometry,b.wkb_geometry) ='t'; ERROR: Operation on mixed SRID geometries shey6 polygon sel10p4 point how can I solve the problem ? regards -- -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Temiz --
You wrote:
> hello
>
> when I enter this command:
>
> select count(*) from shey6 as a,sel10p4 as b where
> contains(a.wkb_geometry,b.wkb_geometry) ='t';
> ERROR: Operation on mixed SRID geometries
>
> shey6 polygon
> sel10p4 point
>
>
> how can I solve the problem ?
>
The data you posted is not really sufficient; the complaint is about the SRID (Spatial Reference IDs) being different, not the type of geometries.
You need to cast at least some of the geometries so that they are all the same -- you can't mix SRIDs -1 and 4326, for instance; one or the other has to be cast. You can do this on the fly within a query but it is likely to be slow. It might be worth your while to consider casting them before hand, or if needed store the cast geometries and a primary key in another table.
If have an index on a geometry column with mixed SRIDS -- don't! It won't work right. You could perhaps functional indexes on the geometries based on SRID but you really can't compare things that are not in the same SRID. Apples and oranges kind of thing.
If you post more details on the SRIDs involved people might be able to give you some better advice.
See the ST_SRID function and perhaps group by the resulting SRIDS to get some counts for how many geometries are involved.
HTH,
Greg Williamson
Senior DBA
GlobeXplorer LLC, a DigitalGlobe company
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information and must be protected in accordance with those provisions. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
(My corporate masters made me say this.)
_______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
hello I created I spatial table from another table. But I am not sure that new table is a proper spatial table. I created it in usual way like this: create table hey_yuk1 as select a.cat as hey_no,b.cat,b.yuk,b.wkb_geometry from shey6 as a,sel10p4 as b where contains(a.wkb_geometry,b.wkb_geometry) ='t' what is the wrong ? regards -- -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Thanks for all the input and ideas.....I think I have a handle on it now. -Steve -----Original Message----- From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Kevin Neufeld Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 11:39 AM To: PostGIS Users Discussion Subject: Re: [postgis-users] Large point table Unfortunately Shane, I totally disagree. If one want to do transforming or grouping in a grid, it's far, far easier to do this in right in PostGIS. Steve, First, aggregating the points into a grid is a great approach. I've been working with a table of ~ 170 million points and using this technique, I've speed up my search queries significantly by grouping these points into a multipoints of about 150-200 points. As you've probably discovered, this can be done by creating a new table, and simply grouping your points using the snaptogrid function. CREATE TABLE new_pt_tbl AS SELECT collect(my_pt) AS my_multi_pt FROM pt_tbl GROUP BY ST_SnapToGrid(my_pt, <grid_size>); Second, a view is the same as a query. A view in postgresql is just a stored query. If you don't want to always type "ST_Transform...." in your query, then using a view is the way to do this. PostGIS is pretty good in doing transforms on the fly, so using a view is a good approach. Keep in mind that you may have to create a functional index on your multipoint geometry column if you want to use an index in Albers. CREATE INDEX new_pt_tbl_idx ON new_pt_tbl USING GIST ON (ST_Transform(my_multi_pt, <Albers SRID>)); If you want to squeeze a little bit more performance out of your query, you can cache the transform as a new column, so it's already precomputed.... but I would not store this in the same table. If the goal here is speed, then duplicating points in your table will double the table size, slowing your query time. Create a new table for this. The problem with this approach is that you now have duplicate data and you may have to write triggers to deal with modifications done to your original points. Hope this helps. Kevin ------------- Kevin Neufeld Software Developer Refractions Research Inc. 300-1207 Douglas St. Victoria, B.C., V8W 2E7 Phone: (250) 383-3022 Email: kneufeld <at> refractions.net Shane Spencer wrote: > stupid mouse.. > > As I was saying.... > > You would be better off pre-transforming them with ogr2ogr.. dump them > to a shapefile, write a quicky script to move the points around to > match your grid (if that is what you are indeed doing) then insert > them into the database as the right projection. > > It sounds like you will have a lot of duplicate points. I recommend > you only insert distinct points into a table, then make a reference > table with smaller data types and a primary key referencing the point > table. Python could handle that kind of insert situation pretty easily. > > On 9/25/07, *Shane Spencer* <shane <at> bogomip.com > <mailto:shane <at> bogomip.com>> wrote: > > you would be better off pre-transforming them with ogr2ogr.. dump > them to a shapefile, write a q > > > On 9/25/07, * Stephen Crawford* < src176 <at> psu.edu > <mailto:src176 <at> psu.edu>> wrote: > > All, > > I have a table of about 30 million point observations. The > geometries are > stored in lon/lat., with a gist index on the column. For > display and > analysis I want to use an albers projection....mostly I'm > aggregating the > points to a grid. Currently I just do the transform(geom) in > my queries. > Would it be better for me to perhaps create a view with the > tranformation > instead of in my query....or should I instead create another > geometry column > in the original table, with the tranformation and do another > gist index on > the new column? What's the best approach? > > Thanks, > Steve > > > Stephen Crawford > Center for Environmental Informatics > The Pennsylvania State University > > _______________________________________________ > postgis-users mailing list > postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net > <mailto:postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net> > http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users > > <http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > _______________________________________________ > postgis-users mailing list > postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net > http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users > _______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
temiz wrote: > hello > > I created I spatial table from another table. > But I am not sure that new table is a proper spatial table. > > I created it in usual way like this: > > create table hey_yuk1 as > select a.cat as hey_no,b.cat,b.yuk,b.wkb_geometry > from shey6 as a,sel10p4 as b where > contains(a.wkb_geometry,b.wkb_geometry) ='t' > > > what is the wrong ? try without the ='t'
That's right, you aren't in Oracle anymore, Dorothy. :) Boolean functions return... a boolean! Not a 't' or 'f'. P On 1-Oct-07, at 6:05 AM, Stephen Woodbridge wrote: > temiz wrote: >> hello >> I created I spatial table from another table. >> But I am not sure that new table is a proper spatial table. >> I created it in usual way like this: >> create table hey_yuk1 as >> select a.cat as hey_no,b.cat,b.yuk,b.wkb_geometry >> from shey6 as a,sel10p4 as b where contains >> (a.wkb_geometry,b.wkb_geometry) ='t' >> what is the wrong ? > > try without the ='t' > _______________________________________________ > postgis-users mailing list > postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net > http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
Actually I think Dorothy can have her way though she probably shouldn't. true and false are overloaded. Try these for example select true = 't', false = 'f', true = 'f', true ='true', false = 'false', true = 'false', false = 'true' Maybe you have your contains backwards - try the below select a.cat as hey_no,b.cat,b.yuk,b.wkb_geometry from shey6 as a,sel10p4 as b where contains (b.wkb_geometry,a.wkb_geometry) = 't' You can leave out the 't' its redundant anyway but in other systems it is bizarrely required because they don't have real booleans. -----Original Message----- From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Paul Ramsey Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 10:47 AM To: PostGIS Users Discussion Subject: Re: [postgis-users] proper spatial table ? That's right, you aren't in Oracle anymore, Dorothy. :) Boolean functions return... a boolean! Not a 't' or 'f'. P On 1-Oct-07, at 6:05 AM, Stephen Woodbridge wrote: > temiz wrote: >> hello >> I created I spatial table from another table. >> But I am not sure that new table is a proper spatial table. >> I created it in usual way like this: >> create table hey_yuk1 as >> select a.cat as hey_no,b.cat,b.yuk,b.wkb_geometry >> from shey6 as a,sel10p4 as b where contains >> (a.wkb_geometry,b.wkb_geometry) ='t' >> what is the wrong ? > > try without the ='t' > _______________________________________________ > postgis-users mailing list > postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net > http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users _______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users ----------------------------------------- The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure pursuant to Massachusetts law. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
hello
when I enter this command:
select count(*) from shey6 as a,sel10p4 as b where contains(a.wkb_geometry,b.wkb_geometry) ='t';
ERROR: Operation on mixed SRID geometries
shey6 polygon
sel10p4 point
how can I solve the problem ?
regards
|
Milo van der Linden
|
De informatie in dit bericht reflecteert mijn persoonlijke mening en niet die van een bedrijf of instantie. Aan de informatie kunnen geen rechten worden ontleend. Indien dit bericht onderdeel is van een forum, mailing-list of community dan gelden automatisch de bij het betreffende medium behorende voorwaarden. The information in this message reflects my personal opinion and not that of a company or public body. All rights reserved.If this message is contained in a mailing-list or community, the rights on the medium are automatically adapted. |
|||
_______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
Hi Regina, how can i be sure to have only one polygon in each multipolygon in a dataset with thousends of polygons? Exists a function to verify that? hasta luego Andreas Obe, Regina schrieb: > Yes you do. ST_ExteriorRing only deals with Polygons not multipolygons or geometry collections. > > There are 2 ways to do it. > > 1) If you have a multipolygon and you are sure you only have one polygon in each multipolygon, then you can do > > SELECT ST_ExteriorRing(ST_GeometryN(the_geom,1)) > FROM ffh_rep > > 2) If you really have multipolygons and you want the exterior ring of each polygon - it's a bit trickier. Try > > SELECT ST_ExterionRing(ST_GeometryN(the_geom, generate_series(1, ST_NumGeometries(the_geom))) > FROM ffh_rep > > If you have a set of GeometryCollection hmm that's even trickier. I would guess 2 layers of series - let me know if that is the case. > > Hope that helps, > Regina > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Andreas Laggner > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 7:00 AM > To: PostGIS Users Discussion > Subject: [postgis-users] ERROR: ExteriorRing: geom is not a polygon > > Moin users, > > i get an error starting with this query (i want to overlay tables > according to this > http://postgis.refractions.net/support/wiki/index.php?ExamplesOverlayTables > > CREATE TEMP TABLE all_lines AS > SELECT St_ExteriorRing (the_geom) AS the_geom FROM ffh_rep > UNION ALL > SELECT St_ExteriorRing (the_geom) AS the_geom FROM spa_rep; > > ERROR: ExteriorRing: geom is not a polygon > > do i have to force my source data to be polygons? How can i do that? > > cheers Andreas > > > > > > Obe, Regina schrieb: > >> Not sure I quite understand the question. You mean to store these 3 geometries separately so you can color code as needed or overlay as needed? >> >> In that case you would have 3 separate geometry fields >> >> intersection(ffh_rep.the_geom, spa_rep.the_geom) As geomintersection, ffh_rep.the_geom As ffh_geom, spa_rep.the_geom As spa_geom >> >> For the ones where there is only udo or kai then I guess you can fill in the same geometry for all geometry fields. >> >> >> and then overlay them on your map as separate layers as needed >> >> or if you mean you just want it to look like figure 1 but not necessarily color coded, then you would do >> >> collect(ffh_rep.the_geom, spa_rep.the_geom) as geomcollection >> >> Hope that helps, >> Regina >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Andreas Laggner >> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 7:24 AM >> To: PostGIS Users Discussion >> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] Union of 7 datasets >> >> Moin Regina, >> >> the query you suggested is a very big step forward, but it does not >> exactly what i want to have... it seems to me i will need an >> intersection in one part and not a geomunion!! But i want to ask you: >> what it does correctly: I now have a union of all geometries from both >> source datasets. >> If i have a single udo (ffh_rep) that intersects no kai (spa_rep) the >> row only has the attributes from udo. Same thing i have with single kai. >> That is all correct. >> BUT: If udo and kai intersects i will not have new polygons!! For >> example: blue is udo (or ffh_rep) and yellow is kai (or spa_rep). I want >> to have three polygons than with blue only the attributes from udo, >> yellow only the attributes from kai AND the intersection, polygon number >> 3, the green one (blue with yellow points) with the attributes from udo >> and kai (figure1). And now i have one Polygon having the attributes from >> udo and kai (figure2). >> >> figure1: >> figure1 >> >> figure2: >> >> figure2 >> >> >> My query: >> drop table natura2000; >> create table natura2000 >> (ffh_name character varying(80),ffh_land character varying(3),ffh >> smallint,ffh_id smallint, >> spa_name character varying(80),spa_land character varying(3),spa >> smallint,spa_id smallint) >> with oids; >> select >> addgeometrycolumn('','natura2000','newgeom','31467','MULTIPOLYGON',2); >> alter table natura2000 drop constraint enforce_geotype_newgeom; >> >> insert into natura2000 >> (ffh_name,ffh_land,ffh,ffh_id,spa_name,spa_land,spa,spa_id,newgeom) >> select ffh_rep.ffh_name,ffh_rep.ffh_land,ffh_rep.ffh,ffh_rep.ffh_id, >> spa_rep.spa_name,spa_rep.spa_land,spa_rep.spa,spa_rep.spa_id, >> geomunion(ffh_rep.the_geom, spa_rep.the_geom) as newgeom >> from ffh_rep inner join spa_rep >> on (ffh_rep.the_geom && spa_rep.the_geom and >> intersects(ffh_rep.the_geom, spa_rep.the_geom)) >> union all >> -- the second select gives you ffh_reps that have no spa_reps - your 15 >> select ffh_rep.ffh_name,ffh_rep.ffh_land,ffh_rep.ffh,ffh_rep.ffh_id, >> null as spa_name, null as spa_land, null as spa, null as spa_id, >> ffh_rep.the_geom as newgeom >> from ffh_rep left join spa_rep >> on (ffh_rep.the_geom && spa_rep.the_geom and >> intersects(ffh_rep.the_geom, spa_rep.the_geom)) >> where spa_rep.the_geom is null >> union all >> -- and the 3rd gives you spa_reps that have no ffh_reps. - your 40 >> select null as ffh_name, null as ffh_land, null as ffh, null as ffh_id, >> spa_rep.spa_name,spa_rep.spa_land,spa_rep.spa,spa_rep.spa_id, >> spa_rep.the_geom AS newgeom >> from spa_rep left join ffh_rep >> on (ffh_rep.the_geom && spa_rep.the_geom and >> intersects(ffh_rep.the_geom, spa_rep.the_geom)) >> where ffh_rep.the_geom is null; >> >> Cheers Andreas >> >> >> >> Obe, Regina schrieb: >> >> >>> Andreas, >>> >>> You would use the SQL UNION predicate like shown below (actually >>> slight correction - it is speedier to use UNION ALL especially when >>> you know there will not be dupiclates since it saves the processing of >>> sorting to get a distinct UNION does an implicit distinct) - so I >>> have corrected below. >>> >>> - - I happened to insert comments in between which may have confused >>> you, but you should be able to run the whole thing as one statement or >>> if you prefer because of speed issues run each insert separately. >>> >>> So would be >>> INSERT INTO sometable(field1, field2,field3,field4, newgeom) >>> SELECT udo.field1, udo.field2, kai.field3, kai.field4, >>> geomunion(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom) AS newgeom >>> FROM udo INNER JOIN kai ON (udo.the_geom && kai.the_geom AND >>> intersects(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom)) >>> UNION ALL >>> -- the second select gives you udos that have no kais - your 15 >>> SELECT udo.field1, udo.field2, NULL As field3, NULL As field4, >>> udo.the_geom AS newgeom >>> FROM udo LEFT JOIN kai ON (udo.the_geom && kai.the_geom AND >>> intersects(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom)) >>> WHERE kai.the_geom IS NULL >>> UNION ALL >>> -- and the 3rd gives you kais that have no udos. - your 40 >>> SELECT NULL As field1, null As field2, kai.field3, kai.field4, >>> kai.the_geom AS newgeom >>> FROM kai LEFT JOIN udo ON (udo.the_geom && kai.the_geom AND >>> intersects(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom)) >>> WHERE udo.the_geom IS NULL; >>> >>> >>> >>> ----If FULL JOIN were to work (which in theory it should, but doesn't >>> seem to with Postgis functions (HINT HINT: would be nice if >>> that worked and can be easily fixed (but sadly I think the issue is >>> deeper than Postgis and Geos) - you could write the above much simpler as) >>> >>> INSERT INTO sometable(field1, field2,field3,field4, newgeom) >>> SELECT udo.field1, udo.field2, kai.field3, kai.field4, >>> COALESCE(geomunion(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom), udo.the_geom, >>> kai.the_geom) AS newgeom >>> FROM udo FULL JOIN kai ON (udo.the_geom && kai.the_geom AND >>> intersects(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom)) >>> >>> Now if you have a lot of these and the tables are very similar in >>> nature and named in a predictable way then the way I usually handle it >>> is to write a pgsql function that dynamically generates the SQL >>> statement to execute either via a FOR loop and then executes the built >>> SQL or set of SQL statements or you could do a similar thing in some >>> scripted language like perl or php. >>> >>> I take it SQL and pgsql and all that is fairly new to you so it might >>> be worthwhile (even though its a lot of typing) to do it the long cut >>> and paste way if nothing more than an exercise to get a feel of how >>> this all works and visualize the patterns at play. >>> >>> I don't get the sense that I comprehend your full problem. >>> Unfortunately I don't have any experience with ArcGIS/ArcView ways of >>> doing things, so I'm not quite sure if there is an equivalent way in >>> PostGIS/PostgreSQL world of doing the same kind of thing and what >>> exactly that thing is you are doing in ArcGIS. >>> >>> Union has 3 meanings in PostGIS/PostgreSQL (actually stuff your >>> favorite spatial/DB here - all non-trivial spatial relational dbs >>> behave more or less the same) >>> >>> 1) unioning of record sets (standard ANSI SQL UNION/UNION ALL) - which >>> is simply a way of stringing together a bunch of selects into a >>> single result set as shown above >>> >>> 2) unioning of 2 geometry fields like shown above with geomunion >>> >>> 3) Aggregate geomunion - aggregate variant of the above geomunion >>> function that groups and unions a whole setof geometries together but >>> requires you are grouping by some field or set of fields). >>> >>> I must also mention there is collect (non-aggregate and aggregate >>> function) which often times is just as effective as the geomunion and >>> in general much faster processor wise. >>> >>> Hope that helps, >>> >>> Regina >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net >>> [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of >>> Andreas Laggner >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:13 AM >>> To: PostGIS Users Discussion >>> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] Union of 7 datasets >>> >>> Obe, Regina schrieb: >>> >>> >>>> Sounds like you would have to go with a full join type thing with >>>> >>>> >>> workaround I described below (last example). So If I understand you >>> correctly then something like this - >>> >>> >>>> --the first select gives you those records in both tables your 25 udokai >>>> SELECT udo.field1, udo.field2, kai.field3, kai.field4, >>>> >>>> >>> geomunion(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom) AS newgeom >>> >>> >>>> FROM udo INNER JOIN kai ON (udo.the_geom && kai.the_geom AND >>>> >>>> >>> intersects(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom)) >>> >>> >>>> UNION >>>> -- the second select gives you udos that have no kais - your 15 >>>> SELECT udo.field1, udo.field2, NULL As field3, NULL As field4, >>>> >>>> >>> udo.the_geom AS newgeom >>> >>> >>>> FROM udo LEFT JOIN kai ON (udo.the_geom && kai.the_geom AND >>>> >>>> >>> intersects(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom)) >>> >>> >>>> WHERE kai.the_geom IS NULL >>>> UNION >>>> -- and the 3rd gives you kais that have no udos. - your 40 >>>> SELECT nul As field1, null As field2, kai.field3, kai.field4, >>>> >>>> >>> kai.the_geom AS newgeom >>> >>> >>>> FROM kai LEFT JOIN udo ON (udo.the_geom && kai.the_geom AND >>>> >>>> >>> intersects(udo.the_geom, kai.the_geom)) >>> >>> >>>> WHERE udo.the_geom IS NULL >>>> >>>> Unioned together you should get >>>> 25 + 15 + 40 = ? 80 >>>> >>>> Hope that helps, >>>> Regina >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> UFF - that seems to be a complex question, a comprehensive operation and >>> a lot to type too!!! Thanks a million - i would have spent many time to >>> find out this query by myself! Ok..... how can i perform your "UNION": I >>> would just insert my selects one after another in one new table - will >>> that work well? >>> I want to aggregate around 20 datasets this way!? Do you know a method >>> to operate with more datasets (for example 7) in a effektiv manner and >>> not to do this three selects 6 times? >>> AND: Am i totally wrong with my aims? It seems to me that is an exotic >>> think to do with PostGis, but our projects/problems require to aggregate >>> datasets in almost all cases (around 90%) and that is exactly what one >>> of the basic functions "Union" in ArcView already carried out ten years >>> ago. So i would exspect there is a function to perform this operation >>> easier!? .....i just wonder..... >>> >>> >>> cheers Andreas >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net >>>> >>>> >>> [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of >>> Andreas Laggner >>> >>> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:28 AM >>>> To: PostGIS Users Discussion >>>> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] Union of 7 datasets >>>> >>>> Obe, Regina schrieb: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> BASIC TRICK: If you want to get all records with no matching >>>>> >>>>> >>> including those that match - put what you would normally put in your >>> WHERE clause in the JOIN clause and use a LEFT JOIN. >>> >>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> ok - it seems to me i need some coaching......Yes, I want to get all >>>> records with no matching including those that match, but i also want to >>>> dissect the polygons that matches. I will try to explain again just to >>>> be sure you understood my aims: I have 20 polygons in udo and 50 in kai. >>>> 10 from kai are intersecting 5 from udo to 25 new polygons i call udokai >>>> (because they have attributes from udo AND kai). My result should have: >>>> 15 polygons with attributes only from udo, 40 polygons with attributes >>>> only from kai AND 25 with attributes from udo and kai! In most cases i >>>> want to do such a operation because i want to aggregate (spatial >>>> correct) different datasets! >>>> Which example from you fits best for this aim? I did not find any >>>> information on how left join works on the postgis or postgresql >>>> >>>> >>> reference... >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Unfortunately as I have come across before if you need an either or >>>>> >>>>> >>> (if in table 1 or table 2 - ideally you would use a FULL JOIN but for >>> some reason Postgres chokes when you use postgis functions in the FULL >>> JOIN clause for the cases I have tried). In that case you need a >>> workaround using a set of UNIONS. >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>> Simplest case - get all records in g1 one or union of g1 and g2 >>>>> >>>>> >>> that intersect >>> >>> >>>>> NOTE: COALESCE is an ANSI SQL function that will return the first >>>>> >>>>> >>> non-null - when you do a geomunion of a geometry and null you get null >>> which is why we need COALESCE >>> >>> >>>>> SELECT g1.field1, g1.field2, COALESCE(geomunion(g1.the_geom, >>>>> >>>>> >>> g2.the_geom), g1.the_geom) AS newgeom >>> >>> >>>>> FROM g1 LEFT JOIN g2 ON (g1.the_geom && g2.the_geom AND >>>>> >>>>> >>> intersects(g1.the_geom, g2.the_geom)) >>> >>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>> Either of case - get all geometries in g1 or g2 or union if there >>>>> >>>>> >>> is a match - workaround for full joins not working right >>> >>> >>>>> SELECT g1.field1, g1.field2, geomunion(g1.the_geom, g2.the_geom) AS >>>>> >>>>> >>> newgeom >>> >>> >>>>> FROM g1 INNER JOIN g2 ON (g1.the_geom && g2.the_geom AND >>>>> >>>>> >>> intersects(g1.the_geom, g2.the_geom)) >>> >>> >>>>> UNION >>>>> SELECT g1.field1, g1.field2, g1.the_geom AS newgeom >>>>> FROM g1 LEFT JOIN g2 ON (g1.the_geom && g2.the_geom AND >>>>> >>>>> >>> intersects(g1.the_geom, g2.the_geom)) >>> >>> >>>>> WHERE g2.the_geom IS NULL >>>>> UNION >>>>> SELECT g1.field1, g1.field2, g2.the_geom AS newgeom >>>>> FROM g2 LEFT JOIN g1 ON (g1.the_geom && g2.the_geom AND >>>>> >>>>> >>> intersects(g1.the_geom, g2.the_geom)) >>> >>> >>>>> WHERE g1.the_geom IS NULL >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hope that helps, >>>>> Regina >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net >>>>> >>>>> >>> [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of >>> Andreas Laggner >>> >>> >>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 11:32 AM >>>>> To: PostGIS Users Discussion >>>>> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] Union of 7 datasets >>>>> >>>>> Obe, Regina schrieb: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Oh the g1 g2 .. was just for example - I don't actually call my >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> tables meaningless names like that. >>> >>> >>>>>> You should be doing a join on something or have a where clause >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> unless one of your tables has only one record. Otherwise you are >>> doing what is called a CROSS JOIN (cartesian product) which gives you >>> an nxm records where n is the number of records in your first table >>> and m is the number in second table. This is generally a big NO NO. >>> In certain rare cases you do want to do something like that, but is >>> usually the exception. >>> >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> I think the records in my targed table must be added (more or less) and >>>>> not multiplied! My Aim is a table that contains the areas of all the 7 >>>>> sourcetables and the information which refuges are inside and wich not. >>>>> Perhaps i must use the intersection!? If i do my query with a gist like >>>>> this: where t1.the_geom && t2.the_geom; than the operation is very fast >>>>> (about one minute) but i only have the Polygons covered by BOTH >>>>> datasets, and i want to have as well those, which are covered by one >>>>> dataset only!! But my operation without the where clause runs for 4 >>>>> hours now - that shows me there is something wrong
>>>>>> >>>>>> create table natura2000 >>>>>> (ffh_name character varying(80), ffh_land character >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> varying(3), ffh >>> >>> >>>>>> smallint, ffh_id smallint, >>>>>> spa_name character varying(80), spa_land character >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> varying(3), spa >>> >>> >>>>>> smallint, spa_id smallint) with oids; >>>>>> select >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> addgeometrycolumn('','natura2000','the_geom','31467','MULTIPOLYGON',2); >>> >>> >>>>>> alter table natura2000 drop constraint enforce_geotype_the_geom; >>>>>> insert into natura2000 >>>>>> select >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> t1.ffh_name,t1.ffh_land,t1.ffh,t1.ffh_id,t2.spa_name,t2.spa_land,t2.spa,t2.spa_id, >>> >>> >>>>>> geomunion(t1.the_geom, t2.the_geom) >>>>>> from ffh_rep t1, spa_rep t2; >>>>>> >>>>>> create table sg71 >>>>>> (ffh_name character varying(80), ffh_land character >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> varying(3), ffh >>> >>> >>>>>> smallint, ffh_id smallint, >>>>>> spa_name character varying(80), spa_land character >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> varying(3), spa >>> >>> >>>>>> smallint, spa_id smallint, >>>>>> bio_name character varying(70), bio smallint, bio_id >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> smallint) with >>> >>> >>>>>> oids; >>>>>> select >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> addgeometrycolumn('','sg71','the_geom','31467','MULTIPOLYGON',2); >>> >>> >>>>>> alter table sg71 drop constraint enforce_geotype_the_geom; >>>>>> insert into sg71 >>>>>> select t1.ffh_name, t1.ffh_land, t1.ffh, t1.ffh_id, t1.spa_name, >>>>>> t1.spa_land, t1.spa, t1.spa_id, >>>>>> t2.name,t2.bio,t2.bio_id,geomunion(t1.the_geom, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> t2.the_geom) >>> >>> >>>>>> from natura2000 t1, biosphere t2; >>>>>> >>>>>> create table sg72 >>>>>> (ffh_name character varying(80), ffh_land character varying(3), >>>>>> ffh smallint, ffh_id smallint, >>>>>> spa_name character varying(80), spa_land character varying(3), spa >>>>>> smallint, spa_id smallint, >>>>>> bio_name character varying(70), bio smallint, bio_id smallint, >>>>>> np_name character varying(60), np smallint, np_id smallint) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> with oids; >>> >>> >>>>>> select >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> addgeometrycolumn('','sg72','the_geom','31467','MULTIPOLYGON',2); >>> >>> >>>>>> alter table sg72 drop constraint enforce_geotype_the_geom; >>>>>> insert into sg72 >>>>>> select t1.ffh_name, t1.ffh_land, t1.ffh, t1.ffh_id, t1.spa_name, >>>>>> t1.spa_land, t1.spa, t1.spa_id, >>>>>> t1.bio_name,t1.bio,t1.bio_id,t2.np_name,t2.np,t2.np_id, >>>>>> geomunion(t1.the_geom, t2.the_geom) >>>>>> from sg71 t1, np t2; >>>>>> AND SO ON...... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> >>>>>>> SELECT g1.somefield, geomunion(gt.the_geom) >>>>>>> FROM (SELECT somefield, the_geom FROM g1 UNION SELECT somefield, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> the_geom FROM g2 ...) gt >>> >>> >>>>>>> GROUP BY gt.somefield >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If I have 7 different tables that have pretty much the same >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> structure, but for logistical or other technical reasons (such as each >>> has additional attributes distinct from one another), I need to keep >>> them as separate tables, then I usually use inherited tables for that. >>> That way when I need to join all datasets at once, I can simply query >>> the parent table and it will automatically drill down to the child >>> tables. Not sure if that helps more than it confuses your situation. >>> >>> >>>>>>> Then instead of the above I can simply do >>>>>>> >>>>>>> SELEG myparenttable.somefield, geomunion(myparenttable.the_geom) >>>>>>> FROM myparenttable >>>>>>> GROUP by gh.somefield >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> ok - i have to think about your suggestions......that´s my second week >>>>>> with postgis. >>>>>> Can you tell me from my SQL-Statements which method will be best? So i >>>>>> try to understand that one..... >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for your reply!!! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hope that helps, >>>>>>> Regina >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of >>> Andreas Laggner >>> >>> >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 9:11 AM >>>>>>> To: PostGis_Mailinglist >>>>>>> Subject: [postgis-users] Union of 7 datasets >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi users, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i want to put together 7 datasets to have all the different >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> refuges in >>> >>> >>>>>>> one table (and in one geometry). Am i doing right with 6 times >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> geomunion >>> >>> >>>>>>> (that´s much to type with all the attributes) or is there a more >>>>>>> effective way? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> cheers Andreas >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Dipl. Geoökologe Andreas Laggner >>> Institut für Ländliche Räume (LR) >>> Bundesforschungsanstalt für Landwirtschaft (FAL) >>> >>> Institute of Rural Studies >>> Federal Agricultural Research Centre (FAL) >>> >>> Bundesallee 50 >>> D-38116 Braunschweig >>> >>> Tel.: (+49) (0)531 596 5515 >>> Fax: (+49) (0)531 596 5599 >>> E-mail: andreas.laggner <at> fal.de >>> Homepage: http://www.lr.fal.de/ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> postgis-users mailing list >>> postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net >>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> *The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be >>> confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure >>> pursuant to Massachusetts law. It is intended solely for the >>> addressee. If you received this in error, please contact the sender >>> and delete the material from any computer. * >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> postgis-users mailing list >>> postgis-users <at> postgis.refractions.net >>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- -- Dipl. Geoökologe Andreas Laggner Institut für Ländliche Räume (LR) Bundesforschungsanstalt für Landwirtschaft (FAL) Institute of Rural Studies Federal Agricultural Research Centre (FAL) Bundesallee 50 D-38116 Braunschweig Tel.: (+49) (0)531 596 5515 Fax: (+49) (0)531 596 5599 E-mail: andreas.laggner <at> fal.de Homepage: http://www.lr.fal.de/
Andreas, You can use ST_NumGeometries If you just want to know the count of records that have more than one polygon in the multipolygon - then do something like - note for below I am also including ST_GeometryType which will tell you if the geometry field is a Multipolygon or geometry collection or multilinestring etc. If it's a multilinestring then the ST_NumGeometries tells you the number of line strings, if it's a geometry collection - then it could be a mish mash of anything like opther multipolygons etc. Hopefully you've only got multipolygons or polygons in there. SELECT count(gid) As totrecords, ST_GeometryType(the_geom) as the_type FROM sometable WHERE ST_NumGeometries(the_geom) > 1 GROUP BY ST_GeometryType(the_geom) If you want to know the actual records SELECT * , ST_NumGeometries(the_geom) As numPolygons FROM sometable WHERE ST_NumGeometries(the_geom) > 1 Will tell you what multipolygons have more than one polygon in each multipolygon Hope that helps, Regina -----Original Message----- From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Andreas Laggner Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 6:45 AM To: PostGIS Users Discussion Subject: Re: [postgis-users] ERROR: ExteriorRing: geom is not a polygon Hi Regina, how can i be sure to have only one polygon in each multipolygon in a dataset with thousends of polygons? Exists a function to verify that? hasta luego Andreas Obe, Regina schrieb: > Yes you do. ST_ExteriorRing only deals with Polygons not multipolygons or geometry collections. > > There are 2 ways to do it. > > 1) If you have a multipolygon and you are sure you only have one polygon in each multipolygon, then you can do > > SELECT ST_ExteriorRing(ST_GeometryN(the_geom,1)) > FROM ffh_rep > > 2) If you really have multipolygons and you want the exterior ring of each polygon - it's a bit trickier. Try > > SELECT ST_ExterionRing(ST_GeometryN(the_geom, generate_series(1, ST_NumGeometries(the_geom))) > FROM ffh_rep > > If you have a set of GeometryCollection hmm that's even trickier. I would guess 2 layers of series - let me know if that is the case. > > Hope that helps, > Regina > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Andreas Laggner > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 7:00 AM > To: PostGIS Users Discussion > Subject: [postgis-users] ERROR: ExteriorRing: geom is not a polygon > > Moin users, > > i get an error starting with this query (i want to overlay tables > according to this > http://postgis.refractions.net/support/wiki/index.php?ExamplesOverlayTables > > CREATE TEMP TABLE all_lines AS > SELECT St_ExteriorRing (the_geom) AS the_geom FROM ffh_rep > UNION ALL > SELECT St_ExteriorRing (the_geom) AS the_geom FROM spa_rep; > > ERROR: ExteriorRing: geom is not a polygon > > do i have to force my source data to be polygons? How can i do that? > > cheers Andreas > > > > > > Obe, Regina schrieb: > >> Not sure I quite understand the question. You mean to store these 3 geometries separately so you can color code as needed or overlay as needed? >> >> In that case you would have 3 separate geometry fields >> >> intersection(ffh_rep.the_geom, spa_rep.the_geom) As geomintersection, ffh_rep.the_geom As ffh_geom, spa_rep.the_geom As spa_geom >> >> For the ones where there is only udo or kai then I guess you can fill in the same geometry for all geometry fields. >> >> >> and then overlay them on your map as separate layers as needed >> >> or if you mean you just want it to look like figure 1 but not necessarily color coded, then you would do >> >> collect(ffh_rep.the_geom, spa_rep.the_geom) as geomcollection >> >> Hope that helps, >> Regina >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net [mailto:postgis-users-bounces <at> postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Andreas Laggner >> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 7:24 AM >> To: PostGIS Users Discussion >> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] Union of 7 datasets >> >> Moin Regina, >> >> the query you suggested is a very big step forward, but it does not >> exactly what i want to have
RSS Feed120 | |
|---|---|
141 | |
94 | |
201 | |
280 | |
220 | |
302 | |
348 | |
247 | |
149 | |
299 | |
289 | |
468 | |
541 | |
612 | |
561 | |
244 | |
352 | |
302 | |
371 | |
249 | |
240 | |
322 | |
352 | |
222 | |
196 | |
320 | |
232 | |
290 | |
241 | |
180 | |
219 | |
223 | |
251 | |
326 | |
151 | |
323 | |
193 | |
323 | |
176 | |
325 | |
196 | |
280 | |
299 | |
310 | |
266 | |
320 | |
179 | |
282 | |
201 | |
235 | |
243 | |
322 | |
265 | |
278 | |
384 | |
338 | |
329 | |
303 | |
481 | |
499 | |
444 | |
324 | |
240 | |
369 | |
196 | |
297 | |
361 | |
285 | |
342 | |
341 | |
358 | |
346 | |
382 | |
266 | |
306 | |
259 | |
278 | |
341 | |
303 | |
326 | |
237 | |
271 | |
256 | |
323 | |
270 | |
379 | |
351 | |
505 | |
318 | |
331 | |
337 | |
355 | |
296 | |
277 | |
323 | |
378 | |
322 | |
418 | |
305 | |
280 | |
185 | |
247 | |
300 | |
247 | |
246 | |
161 | |
192 | |
224 | |
257 | |
279 | |
297 | |
149 | |
174 | |
166 | |
192 | |
152 | |
243 | |
129 | |
141 | |
130 | |
116 | |
1 | |
1 |
