Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Pull 62 #70

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 22, 2018
Merged

Pull 62 #70

merged 6 commits into from
Jun 22, 2018

Conversation

jyutzler
Copy link
Contributor

@jyutzler jyutzler commented Jun 22, 2018

This is a superset of #62

Actions:

  • Add features_0-FIXED.gpkg
  • Commenting out tests and associated code for 19B because that is not part of any adopted GeoPackage version
  • Eliminate an NPE caused by a null geometry
  • Reduced the size of some of the test files to speed things up
  • Identified two new test failures caused by mistakes made in reducing file sizes
  • minor code style changes

ajanett and others added 4 commits May 30, 2018 17:57
featureSRSconsistency - Test extending 13 which is currently only looking at table definitions, but if one inspects the standard, there are additional tests such as inconsistencies between srs_id that need to be examined.  The feature portion of this test has been added to check for inconsistencies between the geopackage contents, the geopackage geometry columns, and the set of srs_id and feature tables.

getFeaturesWithGeometryInfo - Iterator for processing feature geometry tests. This iterator performs the baseline query needed for all feature geometry tests, gathering the gpkg_geometry_columns values that will be checked for consistency against the geometry blob content in each feature.  By processing these tests with the iterator, we can check for errors in each feature table and not just quit at the very first error found.

featureGeometryEncodingTesting – Called by the iterator for each feature table, this test function performs all testing against the geometry blob for each row of the feature table. In order to maintain some processing performance, all of these tests have to be done here rather than re-process the blob for each test separately. The tests do attempt to re-use previously identified data. Each test performed within this group provides a detailed response if an issue is found. Reviewing the tests in here:
19 i   Looks for the correct magic number
19 ii  Looks for the correct version number
19 iii Verifies the binary type
19 iv  Verifies the correct envelope flag values
33     Verifies the srs_id. This test also will check for byte swap errors within the srs_id, hence by putting the test before 19 v, it will catch potential byte swap errors that may affect retrieval of the envelope.
19 v   If the geometry is empty but the envelope is not empty, triggers an error
20     Verifies the geometry type from within the WKB. This test also will check for possible byte swap errors within the WKB.
32	Checks if the WKB geometry type (subtype) is allowed based on the geometry type provided by gpkg_geometry_columns.
66	Partial – included only a check on the WKB item count value (when applicable) at this time. WKB processing is going to suck down a huge amount of processing time!
67	Check for gpkg_extensions for gpkg_geom_<feature> for the feature (when there are extensions).
NSG 19B Ensure the geopackage extents from gpkg_geometry_columns contains the feature envelope.
78	Verify that the rtree trigger accurately contains the feature envelope when there are rtree extensions

featureGeometryColumnsDataValuesTableNameNEW – Added because it does not appear that the existing tests for 23 and 26 are compliant with OGC 12-128r14.


Also:
Clean up of escaped single quotes in SQL statements.
@jyutzler jyutzler changed the title I62 Pull 62 Jun 22, 2018
@jyutzler jyutzler merged commit cffb9bc into opengeospatial:master Jun 22, 2018
@jyutzler jyutzler deleted the i62 branch June 22, 2018 14:21
@ajanett
Copy link
Contributor

ajanett commented Jun 22, 2018

@jyutzler Yes, thanks!

@lgoltz lgoltz added this to the 0.7 milestone Jun 26, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants