Hi, Itamar’s comment should be helpful to you. Try setting a query-time distErrPct of 0 (exact to the grid), keeping the default index time of 2.5%. When I dig into problems like this, I often bring up SpatialSolrSandbox, the “Playground” page, and put in the WKT to generate a KML that I view in Google Earth.
Note that as of Lucene-spatial v4.7 there is the new SerializedDVStrategy which, when used in conjunction with the grid, should eliminate any inexactness introduced by the grid. See my blog post on this subject: http://www.opensourceconnections.com/blog/2014/04/11/indexing-polygons-in-lucene-with-accuracy/ ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 8:45 AM, regina <reg...@ayende.com> wrote: > Hi, > I am looking into how Lucene-Spatial handles relationships between shapes, > and seeing some weird (or at least I think that they are weird) results. > I am trying to work out how the relationships are calculated and I believe > I > understand the theory behind it. > The results I am seeing, does not fit into the theory I've read up to now. > For example: > I am trying to test whether POLYGON ((4.5 4.5, 6.5 4.5, 6.5 6.5, 4.5 6.5, > 4.5 4.5)) is within POLYGON ((6 6, 7 6, 7 7, 6 7, 6 6)). Surprisingly, I am > seeing that it is "within". > I am trying this with GeohashPrefixTree strategy and max tree level 8. > > Is this the answer that should be getting, or am I doing something wrong? > > It should be noted that I am using .Net port of Lucene-Spatial to query > this. > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/relationships-between-shapes-in-Lucene-Spatial-tp4137641.html > Sent from the Lucene - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
