Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Hmm ... shouldn't path_distance be MIN distance not MAX distance?

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Hmm ... shouldn't path_distance be MIN distance not MAX distance?
Date: 2000-07-31 05:26:50
Message-ID: 39850E1A.B42F8E9E@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
> I just noticed that path_distance() in geo_ops.c (the "<->" operator
> for path datatype) claims to be computing the minimum distance between
> any two line segments of the two paths, but actually it's computing the
> maximum such distance.
> Isn't this broken?

Sure sounds like it :(

                  - Thomas

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2000-07-31 06:09:25
Subject: Re: gram.y now producing warnings?
Previous:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2000-07-31 05:26:01
Subject: Re: pre-6.1-to-6.1 conversion procs slated for destruction

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Oliver ElphickDate: 2000-07-31 05:40:08
Subject: Re: Inheritance
Previous:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-07-31 03:20:15
Subject: Re: pg_dump & performance degradation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group