Re: Commit fest 2014-12, let's begin!

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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