postgis types are a bit too generic
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Scala
- Stars
- 1.7k
- Forks
- 175
- Avg merge
- 5d 14h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 9
Description
It's slightly awkward having the 3D and 4D geometry types share the same type as the 2D geometry types; as:
- there's no codec-level type safety like there is for other postgres types
- you have to add extra assertions or transform the codec type into your own type, something which you don't have to do for other primitive postgres types
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
The issue does not name files or tests. Start by locating the PostGIS geometry codec definitions and existing PostgreSQL type tests, then determine how dimensionality is currently represented. Done means 3D and 4D geometry types have distinct codec-level types from 2D types without requiring extra assertions or user-defined transformations.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- postgres, scala
- Domain
- databases
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100