issue_comments: 1030468418
This data as json
| html_url | issue_url | id | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at | author_association | body | reactions | issue | performed_via_github_app |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/399#issuecomment-1030468418 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/399 | 1030468418 | IC_kwDOCGYnMM49a7NC | 9599 | 2022-02-05T00:49:08Z | 2022-02-05T22:59:06Z | OWNER | I'm trying to think of ways to make this nicer from the perspective of someone calling the `.insert()` or `.insert_all()` methods against a table that has geometry columns. One option would be for the code to introspect the table (if it exists) before running the insert, looking for any geometry columns. This introspection isn't easy! The table schema just gives you `"name_of_column" point` or similar - to figure out the SRID and suchlike you need to consult the `geometry_columns` table, I think - which throws a 500 error on https://calands.datasettes.com/calands/geometry_columns for some reason. Also does the shape of that table change between SpatiaLite versions? Assuming we can introspect the table, what would we do with that information? We could add code that detects if the user attempted to pass GeoJSON objects and automatically inserts a `GeomFromGeoJSON()` function call - but detecting GeoJSON is a bit weird, and GeoJSON also isn't necessarily the nicest format for populating e.g. latitude/longitude points. Maybe we just support the simplest possible case: a tuple of floats, which we assume is `latitude, longitude` (or should we expect `longitude, latitude`, the eternal debate?) - if those are used against a geometry table (especially a point table) we assume they are coordinates that need to be converted using `GeomFromText('POINT(...`. Not crazy about either of these ideas. Is there something better? | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | 1124731464 |