From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Commit fest 2014-12, let's begin! |
Date: | 2014-12-15 15:20:14 |
Message-ID: | 22640.1418656814@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com
>> wrote:
>> Right. I also looked at it briefly, but I wasn't sure if we really want
>> it. AFAICT, no-one has actually asked for that operator, it was written
>> only to be an example of an operator that would benefit from the knn-gist
>> with recheck patch.
> Lack of recheck is major limitation of KNN-GiST now. People are not asking
> for that because they don't know what is needed to implement exact KNN for
> PostGIS. Now they have to invent kluges like this:
> [ query using ORDER BY ST_Distance ]
It's not apparent to me that the proposed operator is a replacement for
ST_Distance. The underlying data in an example like this won't be either
points or polygons, it'll be PostGIS datatypes.
In short, I believe that PostGIS could use what you're talking about,
but I agree with Heikki's objection that nobody has asked for this
particular operator.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2014-12-15 15:22:54 | Re: Commit fest 2014-12, let's begin! |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2014-12-15 15:19:19 | Re: Fractions in GUC variables |