[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4294?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17582612#comment-17582612
]
Julian Hyde commented on CALCITE-4294:
--------------------------------------
Thanks for the PR, [~bchapuis]. I added you to 'contributor' role and assigned
this case to you.
I quickly reviewed the PR and it looks great. Some tidying required (e.g.
removing print statements, perhaps updating some comments such as 'NOTE: there
is no Geometry.Type.MultiPolygon', getting checkerframework to pass) but it
looks very close. I've assigned 'fixVersion = 1.32' so that we get it to
completion. Can you add commits to fix those issues, and update this case when
it's ready for final review.
I think it's fine that behavior has changed a bit, especially if it is moving
towards PostGIS. Can you add some commentary here on the sort of changes? It
will help people who are upgrading after 1.32.
Do you have any other remarks about differences between the two libraries? You
mentioned SRID handling in the PR.
Lastly, are there are any features that would be possible once we have
completed the switch to the new library? I am curious what possibilities are
opened up.
> Use JTS rather than ESRI as the underlying library for geospatial (ST_)
> functions
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-4294
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4294
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: spatial
> Reporter: Julian Hyde
> Assignee: Bertil Chapuis
> Priority: Major
>
> The geospatial functions are currently implemented using the ESRI library. We
> should consider using JTS instead. AT the time we started work on geospatial
> the JTS did not have a suitable license, but this is no longer the case. I
> gather that JTS is a superior library.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
