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

Is a 512x512 file without internal overview a proper COG ? #1403

Closed
vincentsarago opened this issue Mar 29, 2019 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1404
Closed

Is a 512x512 file without internal overview a proper COG ? #1403

vincentsarago opened this issue Mar 29, 2019 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1404

Comments

@vincentsarago
Copy link
Contributor

Hi, I'm a bit confused by the language used in

if main_band.XSize >= 512 or main_band.YSize >= 512:
if check_tiled:
block_size = main_band.GetBlockSize()
if block_size[0] == main_band.XSize and block_size[0] > 1024:
errors += [
'The file is greater than 512xH or Wx512, but is not tiled']
if ovr_count == 0:
warnings += [
'The file is greater than 512xH or Wx512, it is recommended '
'to include internal overviews']

This might be a special case but I have a 512x512 file without internal overview nor internal tiles (because my profile has default 512x512 tile size) and thus the script is not considering my file as a proper cog and telling me the file is greater than 512x512 which it isn't the case

IMO we should replace the >=512 bit >512 in L90.

@vincentsarago
Copy link
Contributor Author

edits:
The scripts tells the file is a proper COG (🤦‍♂️) but warns about not having internal overview

The following warnings were found:
 - The file is greater than 512xH or Wx512, it is recommended to include internal overviews

output.tif is a valid cloud optimized GeoTIFF

@rouault
Copy link
Member

rouault commented Mar 29, 2019

I'm fine with a PR fixing this warning. > 512 looks good to me

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants