Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
#1209 closed defect (fixed)
WCPS1.5_Difference between origins of coverages with WCPS1.0
Reported by: | Bang Pham Huu | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | 10.0 |
Component: | petascope | Version: | development |
Keywords: | WCPS 2.0, difference between coverages origin | Cc: | Dimitar Misev, Vlad Merticariu, Alex Dumitru |
Complexity: | Medium |
Description (last modified by )
Now, I'm testing WCPS 2.0 and this ticket still open then I will report to here, test wcps "35-coordinates_in_wgs84_crs.test.out" with WCPS query
for c in (eobstest) return encode( (c[ t(1), Long:"http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/4326" (20:35), Lat:"http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/4326" (10:15)]), "tiff", "nodata=0")
+ Version 1.0 returns the rasql like (returns TOP-DOWN trimming)
select encode(c[1,-10:20,121:131], "GTiff", "nodata=0;xmin=20.0;xmax=35.0;ymin=10.0;ymax=15.0;crs=EPSG:4326") from eobstest AS c where oid(c)=46081
+ Version 2.0 returns the Rasql like (returns BOTTOM_UP trimming)
Version 2.0 returns the rasql like SELECT encode( ( c[1,-10:19,121:130] ) , "GTiff" , "nodata=0;xmin=25.0;xmax=75.5;ymin=-40.5;ymax=75.5;crs=EPSG:4326") FROM eobstest AS c
view output in here https://drive.google.com/a/fimo.edu.vn/folderview?id=0B_VL2-SVlKPHNHpacVRHUDdQalk&usp=drive_web (file .oracle is WCPS 1.0 and file .out is WCPS 2.0).
Change History (5)
comment:1 by , 9 years ago
comment:2 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:3 by , 9 years ago
Dimitar, it is wrong in description, actually it is test 35, the links is correct thanks.
comment:4 by , 9 years ago
Milestone: | 9.2 → 10.0 |
---|---|
Summary: | WCPS2.0_Difference between origins of coverages with WCPS1.0 → WCPS1.5_Difference between origins of coverages with WCPS1.0 |
comment:5 by , 9 years ago
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
the problem is fixed in http://rasdaman.org/ticket/1244 with the oracles and queries from this ticket.
Is the link correct? In the ticket you refer to query 52, in the drive I see 35?
As far as I can see WCPS 2.0 sets the coverage boundaries instead of the subset boundaries as it is supposed to.