[postgis-devel] Should EMPTY be spatially equal to self ?

Paragon Corporation lr at pcorp.us
Sun Jan 15 13:32:15 PST 2012


> I don't expect anyone to do anything.
> Anyway, if they do, they'll get a clean version of the 2.0 release.
> And note that it's still too early to do that, as 2.0 isn't out yet.
> 
> Also note that the only change you get by doing or not the 
> dump/reload is using or not an index when you use the ~= operator.

Okay don't care much about that operator as long as you don't change
ST_Equals to
use it.  That operator is not used much anyway and is only in
ST_OrderingEquals which is
also not that commonly used.
> 
> Also note that the documentation (the one you removed) was 
> already advertising ~= as using an index.
> 
I don't plan to put it back.  That operator has aggrevated me since 1.3-1.4
because whenever I deal with someone -- I have no way of knowing what that
operator will do.
And now strk is using my own documentation against me :)

If we bring it back it should go by another name.


> Which "same version" ? 2.0.0SVN ?
> You can't expect an "SVN" version to ever be equal to self..
> 

I'm not talking about that.  I'm talking about tools that have to support
1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.0.0 (if you use 1.3 it means goemetric quality, if you use
1.4-1.5 it means
geometric equality or bounding box equality, if you use 2.0.0 it may or may
not use an index (and right now since we 
don't have any tagged releases -- we can't even tell people how they need to
upgrade).

You get my frustration?

> > You know what would be REALLY USEFUL.  IF we had a real geometric 
> > equality operator like ~= used to be in 1.3 so that people 
> who want to 
> > use CONSTRAINT EXCLUSION to enforce uniqueness of their geometries 
> > CAN.
> 
> Filed a ticket about it ?
> 
I meant to say EXCLUSION constraints -- and yes ticketed at:
http://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/1471

Note we probably could easily squeeze this in 2.0, but I don't care cause I
have no need for it at the moment, but I know several on the list
have expressed interest mostly for point data which ~= doesn't quite work
for because of the float / double issue you can get points really close that
are not the same that would be flagged wrong.

Thanks,
Regina





More information about the postgis-devel mailing list