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

Add support for WCS layers for GDAL based tools in Processing #28963

Closed
qgib opened this issue Jan 31, 2019 · 9 comments
Closed

Add support for WCS layers for GDAL based tools in Processing #28963

qgib opened this issue Jan 31, 2019 · 9 comments
Labels
Feature Request Processing Relating to QGIS Processing framework or individual Processing algorithms

Comments

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor

qgib commented Jan 31, 2019

Author Name: Hans Erik Jacobsen (@haej)
Original Redmine Issue: 21145

Redmine category:processing/gdal


The function Raster>Extraction>Clip Raster by Extend fails when rasterlayer is WCS

Workaround: RightClick layer, use Export>Save As..., and use Map Canvas Extent

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Jan 31, 2019

Author Name: Giovanni Manghi (@gioman)


This is duplicate of another ticket (a feature request) where is asked to allow use WCS layer as input layers for Processing tools, at the moment they are not supported.


  • status_id was changed from Open to Feedback

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Jan 31, 2019

Author Name: Nyall Dawson (@nyalldawson)


Actually they work for native QGIS algorithms, just not the gdal based ones

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Jan 31, 2019

Author Name: Giovanni Manghi (@gioman)


Nyall Dawson wrote:

Actually they work for native QGIS algorithms, just not the gdal based ones

mapserver wcs layers do not show as input for qgis core tools. GDAL tools give an error like "FAILURE: No target dataset specified.".

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Jan 31, 2019

Author Name: Nyall Dawson (@nyalldawson)


mapserver wcs layers do not show as input for qgis core tools.

Hmm - that's a bug in itself. They do work, they are just filtered from the GUI. I'll fix.

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Jan 31, 2019

Author Name: Nyall Dawson (@nyalldawson)


Actually I can't confirm this - if I add a WCS layer I can pick it as an input for native tools like "Raster Surface Volume", "Reclassify by table", etc. It's slow, but that's expected when working directly with a remote source like WCS...

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Jan 31, 2019

Author Name: Giovanni Manghi (@gioman)


Nyall Dawson wrote:

Actually I can't confirm this - if I add a WCS layer I can pick it as an input for native tools like "Raster Surface Volume", "Reclassify by table", etc. It's slow, but that's expected when working directly with a remote source like WCS...

you are right, I tried again and it seems to work here too... weird, probably I hit a glitch.

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Mar 9, 2019

Author Name: Giovanni Manghi (@gioman)


  • status_id was changed from Feedback to Open
  • tracker_id was changed from 1 to 2
  • subject was changed from Clip WCS Raster by Extent to Add support for WCS layers for GDAL based tools in Processing
  • category_id was changed from Rasters to Processing/GDAL

@qgib qgib added Feature Request Processing Relating to QGIS Processing framework or individual Processing algorithms labels May 25, 2019
@alexbruy
Copy link
Contributor

Duplicates #15322.

@damateos
Copy link

damateos commented Oct 8, 2020

Hi,
I didn't know if publish this here or in #15322, but I think the title of this issue is more accurate with the problem.
Nowadays the WCS layers are valid layer inputs for native tools as "Raster Surface Volume", "Reclassify by table" or "Export" but not for the GDAL processing tools.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feature Request Processing Relating to QGIS Processing framework or individual Processing algorithms
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants