Re: R-Tree operators
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: R-Tree operators |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87pt4ko9xp.fsf@stark.xeocode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: R-Tree operators (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: R-Tree operators
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes: > > I don't understand what overlap_{left,right} are supposed to mean. > > In this thread: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2004-03/msg01135.php > we had decided that the rtree stuff is not only poorly documented > but actively broken. I had thought that Bill White was going to do > some work on the problem, but we've not heard back from him ... Well that's regarding existing the rtree operator classes for existing geometric types. What I'm wondering is what invariants I have to maintain if I'm defining a new operator class. I'm starting to get a better idea of what's going on here though. Is it the case that the operators in the operator class are only used when actually doing an index scan? For building the index it uses the support functions (union,intersection,size)? Part of the confusion here is that left,right,overleft,overright only make sense for 1-dimension cases like intervals. For more dimensions it seems they make little sense at all. I would be happy if I could just leave them out. As long as the rtree code can still build the index fine using the support functions and just not handle access patterns using them I'll be fine. -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: