From: | A B <gentosaker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | postgresql Forums <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Index on points |
Date: | 2010-09-26 13:51:08 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinrBiRtF9ouMUqnQn5_3m1vkdL_2FhL3f8kV9t=@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
2010/9/25 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
>> There's no reason that there couldn't be a point <@ box operator in the
>> opclass, but nobody really uses these geometric types that come with
>> core postgres (at least, not that I can tell).
>
> Actually, as of 9.0 there is a point_ops opclass for GIST, with these
> indexable operators:
>
> >^(point,point)
> <<(point,point)
> >>(point,point)
> <^(point,point)
> ~=(point,point)
> <@(point,box)
> <@(point,polygon)
> <@(point,circle)
>
> I agree that for any more than light-duty geometric work, you ought
> to look at PostGIS.
>
> regards, tom lane
Thank you Jeff for your reply, that solved the problem.
Tom, would you like to elaborate on that PostGIS should be used for
other than "light-duty" geometric work?
Is it speed, accuracy or features that is the difference?
For this project I think <@(point,box) is sufficient. What would it
take to motivate a switch to PostGIS for that?
Best wishes.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Fetter | 2010-09-26 13:59:41 | Re: How to dump only the the data without schema? |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2010-09-26 13:05:44 | Re: psql copy command - 1 char limitation on delimiter |