I like the approach of using a new kind of coverage reader, the limitation
is of course providing a suitable grid size (even though as an actual
coverage your mathematical surface is not limited to a grid).

--
Jody Garnett

On 6 April 2016 at 13:02, Justin Deoliveira <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I’m working on a project to expose Solr’s heatmap capability through
> GeoServer. You can find details about Solr heatmaps here:
>
>     https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Spatial+Search (search
> for “Heatmap Faceting”.
>
> But the gist of it is this: If you have a spatial field that uses the
> recursive prefix tree type (ie. geohash) for indexing then it’s easy using
> Solr’s facetting infrastructure to generate a heatmap grid. What you get
> back from Solr is a 2D array representing the geohash grid, where each
> value is a count of documents that intersect that grid cell. Applying some
> symbolization you can get something that looks like this:
>
>
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/voyagersearch/leaflet-solr-heatmap/master/sample.png
>
> The above screen shot comes from a leaflet plugin that visualizes the
> heatmap directly in the browser. I would like to add a similar looking
> visualization for GeoTools/GeoServer.
>
> My first thought was to expose this as a new type of coverage reader,
> since the data is simple grid it falls into the model quite easily. The
> major benefit of this approach is that becomes trivial to configure in
> GeoServer and easy to style using all of the existing raster symbology
> support. I’m interested to hear if others think this is a good approach.
>
> If that sounds good my plan was to add this to the existing solr module.
> It won’t add any new dependencies aside from a dependency on the coverage
> module.
>
> @Andrea: you’re listed as the module maintainer… although if I recall
> correctly we agreed to co-maintain the module?
>
> I have a prototype working so if that all sounds good I’ll push up a
> branch for folks to look at. One thing I am particular eager to get some
> feed back on is how to best achieve the blur affect that makes heatmaps
> look “
> pretty”. At the moment what I have done is baked in a parameter to the
> coverage format that specifies a blur radius and then when reading the
> coverage I run it through the Convolve operation to achieve the desired
> affect. It would be ideal if this could be done at symbolization time. I’m
> wondering if we currently have any way to define a blur or some similar
> effect at rendering time with sld? Would a rendering transform work?
>
> Thanks folks.
>
> -Justin
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> GeoTools-Devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to