Thread: PGDG repo differences for RHEL 6.6 / 7.

PGDG repo differences for RHEL 6.6 / 7.

From
"Graeme B. Bell"
Date:
Hi,

We use PGDG rpms for postgres and postgis, and to make sure postgis works as expected we use the PGDG GDAL build that
accompaniesit.  
However, we run Centos 7 on some machines (mostly newer development machines) and Centos 6.6 on our servers.

Is there a reason why the RHEL6 branch of PGDG uses gdal 1.9, whereas the RHEL7 branch uses gdal 1.11?

Currently because PGDG postgis/gdal rpms are built against two different versions of gdal which means our systems
aren'tconsistent. 
For example, drivers, bugfixes/performance are different.

For GIS database work it would be great if we could keep these consistent and then we know that GDAL-originating errors
willbe replicable in both environments.  

Graeme.

Re: PGDG repo differences for RHEL 6.6 / 7.

From
Devrim Gündüz
Date:
Hi,

On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 11:57 +0000, Graeme B. Bell wrote:

> We use PGDG rpms for postgres and postgis, and to make sure postgis works as expected we use the PGDG GDAL build that
accompaniesit.  
> However, we run Centos 7 on some machines (mostly newer development machines) and Centos 6.6 on our servers.
>
> Is there a reason why the RHEL6 branch of PGDG uses gdal 1.9, whereas the RHEL7 branch uses gdal 1.11?

We always try to use new technologies in newer releases. GDAL 1.11 has
some features that people will benefit.

> Currently because PGDG postgis/gdal rpms are built against two different versions of gdal which means our systems
aren'tconsistent. 
> For example, drivers, bugfixes/performance are different.
>
> For GIS database work it would be great if we could keep these consistent and then we know that GDAL-originating
errorswill be replicable in both environments.  

Well, you can always build your RPMs on CentOS 7 machines using the
SRPMs for CentOS 6. We cannot stick with old version for long time.

Regards,

--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR


Attachment

Re: PGDG repo differences for RHEL 6.6 / 7.

From
"Graeme B. Bell"
Date:

On 27 Jan 2015, at 17:33, Devrim Gündüz <devrim@gunduz.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 11:57 +0000, Graeme B. Bell wrote:
>
>> We use PGDG rpms for postgres and postgis, and to make sure postgis works as expected we use the PGDG GDAL build
thataccompanies it.  
>> However, we run Centos 7 on some machines (mostly newer development machines) and Centos 6.6 on our servers.
>>
>> Is there a reason why the RHEL6 branch of PGDG uses gdal 1.9, whereas the RHEL7 branch uses gdal 1.11?
>
> We always try to use new technologies in newer releases. GDAL 1.11 has
> some features that people will benefit.
>
>> Currently because PGDG postgis/gdal rpms are built against two different versions of gdal which means our systems
aren'tconsistent. 
>> For example, drivers, bugfixes/performance are different.
>>
>> For GIS database work it would be great if we could keep these consistent and then we know that GDAL-originating
errorswill be replicable in both environments.  
>
> Well, you can always build your RPMs on CentOS 7 machines using the
> SRPMs for CentOS 6. We cannot stick with old version for long time.

Hi Devrim,

Thanks very much for your reply.

- Do you think there is any possibility that the PGDG RHEL6 builds could be updated to gdal 1.11 to match the RHEL7
branch?

- It seems that there is no "BIGTIFF" support in the PGDG GDAL in RHEL6.
This is strange because BIGTIFF has been supported since GDAL 1.4.4 (2007).
That means that raster sizes are limited to 4GB which is pretty small for anyone doing national level work.

Is there any reason that the BIGTIFF option isn't supported or could it be enabled in future builds?
Perhaps the person who is building is not using libtiff or has disabled it?

===
> gdalwarp A.tif B.tif -co "BIGTIFF=YES"
  Creating output file that is 120000P x 150000L.
  Warning 6: Driver GTiff does not support BIGTIFF creation option
===

Graeme.

Re: PGDG repo differences for RHEL 6.6 / 7.

From
Devrim Gündüz
Date:
Hi Graeme,

On Mon, 2015-02-02 at 13:47 +0000, Graeme B. Bell wrote:

> - Do you think there is any possibility that the PGDG RHEL6 builds
> could be updated to gdal 1.11 to match the RHEL7 branch?

No. That will break RHEL 6. (I am also an EPEL packager, and I know what
it feels to push such an update to RHEL ...)

> - It seems that there is no "BIGTIFF" support in the PGDG GDAL in
> RHEL6.
> This is strange because BIGTIFF has been supported since GDAL 1.4.4
> (2007).
> That means that raster sizes are limited to 4GB which is pretty small
> for anyone doing national level work.
>
> Is there any reason that the BIGTIFF option isn't supported or could
> it be enabled in future builds?
> Perhaps the person who is building is not using libtiff or has
> disabled it?

AFAICS, libtiff > 4.0 is required for BIGTIFF support, and RHEL 6 has
libtiff 3.9.4. Again, AFAICS, GDAL's configure can pick BIGTIFF support
automagically when it finds the related version of libtiff. I suppose
RHEL 7 has this support.

Regards,
--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR


Attachment

Re: PGDG repo differences for RHEL 6.6 / 7.

From
"Graeme B. Bell"
Date:
Thanks for the information Devrim. 

We've been considering a faster move to RHEL7, and it's helpful to have an outside opinion on the topics below.

Also, thanks for the comment on libtiff 4.

Graeme. 

On 03 Feb 2015, at 11:58, Devrim Gündüz <devrim@gunduz.org> wrote:

> 
> Hi Graeme,
> 
> On Mon, 2015-02-02 at 13:47 +0000, Graeme B. Bell wrote:
> 
>> - Do you think there is any possibility that the PGDG RHEL6 builds
>> could be updated to gdal 1.11 to match the RHEL7 branch?
> 
> No. That will break RHEL 6. (I am also an EPEL packager, and I know what
> it feels to push such an update to RHEL ...)
> 
>> - It seems that there is no "BIGTIFF" support in the PGDG GDAL in
>> RHEL6.
>> This is strange because BIGTIFF has been supported since GDAL 1.4.4
>> (2007). 
>> That means that raster sizes are limited to 4GB which is pretty small
>> for anyone doing national level work. 
>> 
>> Is there any reason that the BIGTIFF option isn't supported or could
>> it be enabled in future builds? 
>> Perhaps the person who is building is not using libtiff or has
>> disabled it? 
> 
> AFAICS, libtiff > 4.0 is required for BIGTIFF support, and RHEL 6 has
> libtiff 3.9.4. Again, AFAICS, GDAL's configure can pick BIGTIFF support
> automagically when it finds the related version of libtiff. I suppose
> RHEL 7 has this support.
> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Devrim GÜNDÜZ
> Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
> Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
>