Re: Why does the raster type not have send/receive defined?

Copy vs insert is legit going to be faster, but that’s not a binary cursor thing, it’s batching up all the transactions and parsing nicely into one big bundle as COPY does. You should still be able to do a bulk copy without using send/recv. 

P

> On Apr 8, 2025, at 8:30 AM, Lukas Panhirsch <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> That makes sense, thank you both.
> I believe I've seen some performance improvements with COPY instead of
> INSERT for large amounts of vector rows against a PostgreSQL server with
> relatively high storage latency, but on the other hand I'm inserting far
> fewer rows in the raster case, so I doubt I'd see the same improvement
> there.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Lukas
> 
> On 4/8/25 17:18, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> > Yes this. The utility of the send/recv function are in supporting a
> > client that is using a binary cursor. This doesn’t even happen much for
> > vector data anymore (there was a brief period when we all felt it was de
> > rigeur, and then it got benchmarked and it wasn’t that noticeable at all
> > as a performance tweak, so everyone stopped, because it added
> complexity).
> >
> > P
> >
> >> On Apr 8, 2025, at 8:15 AM, <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think it’s because postgis raster is not an OGC standard or any kind
> >> of standard outside of PostGIS so there hasn’t been much need for it.
> >> For example if you wanted to backup your postgis raster table, you’d
> >> just use standard pg_dump / pg_restore tools.
> >> Most use cases beyond that are importing from a different raster
> >> format or exporting to a different raster format which functions
> >> https://postgis.net/docs/en/RT_ST_FromGDALRaster.html <https://
> >> postgis.net/docs/en/RT_ST_FromGDALRaster.html <http://postgis.net/docs/en/RT_ST_FromGDALRaster.html>>
> >> andhttps://postgis.net/docs/en/RT_ST_AsGDALRaster.html <https://
> >> postgis.net/docs/en/RT_ST_AsGDALRaster.html <http://postgis.net/docs/en/RT_ST_AsGDALRaster.html>>
> >> as well as the raster2pgsql commandline tool.
> >> *From:*Lukas Panhirsch via postgis-users <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >> *Sent:*Tuesday, April 8, 2025 9:28 AM
> >> *To:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >> *Subject:*Why does the raster type not have send/receive defined?
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I haven't used this mailing list before and couldn't figure out how to
> >> search in the archives, so I apologize if this has been answered before.
> >>
> >> Is there any specific reason why the raster type does not have the
> >> send/receive functions in its SQL type definition?
> >> The geometry type has these defined as conversions to/from EWKB, which
> >> are equivalent to ST_AsEWKB/ST_GeomFromEWKB if I understand correctly.
> >> Equivalent (E?)WKB conversion functions exist for rasters in the form
> >> of (RT_)ST_AsBinary/ST_RastFromWKB, but have to be called explicitly.
> >> I would like to use PostgreSQL features like COPY ... WITH BINARY with
> >> rasters, but it seems this is preventing me from doing so.
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> Lukas
> >