You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
When uploading training areas/aoi and aoi labels, we need to loop through each feature and then transform the feature to a WKT on the client before sending it to the backend.
Describe the solution you'd like
It would be great if the backend could accept the GeoJSON feature directly. This will eliminate the transformation step and remove some dependencies on the front end.
Describe alternatives you've considered
An alternative I've considered will be for the backend to accept the raw GeoJSON file directly as the user uploads it, without needing to read the file, loop through it, and send each feature to the backend. This is especially important for AOI labels because a GeoJSON file can have hundreds of labels.
Therefore, looping through each feature and making multiple concurrent API calls, just for a single AOI, is inefficient. See the attached screenshot for the concurrent calls made for a single AOI. Imagine uploading labels for about 5 different AOIs with each having 100 labels/features.
But if the backend gets the GeoJSON file directly, it can easily update the database by looping, batching, or even sending it to a background task.
Overall, this will lead to technical efficiency and also improve the user experience.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
When uploading training areas/aoi and aoi labels, we need to loop through each feature and then transform the feature to a WKT on the client before sending it to the backend.
Describe the solution you'd like
It would be great if the backend could accept the GeoJSON feature directly. This will eliminate the transformation step and remove some dependencies on the front end.
Describe alternatives you've considered
An alternative I've considered will be for the backend to accept the raw GeoJSON file directly as the user uploads it, without needing to read the file, loop through it, and send each feature to the backend. This is especially important for AOI labels because a GeoJSON file can have hundreds of labels.
Therefore, looping through each feature and making multiple concurrent API calls, just for a single AOI, is inefficient. See the attached screenshot for the concurrent calls made for a single AOI. Imagine uploading labels for about 5 different AOIs with each having 100 labels/features.
But if the backend gets the GeoJSON file directly, it can easily update the database by looping, batching, or even sending it to a background task.
Overall, this will lead to technical efficiency and also improve the user experience.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: