On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Chris Male <gento...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> >> On Apr 14, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Chris Male wrote: >> > For those doing just Cartesian Tier filtering it seems like the new >> > approach is a win, but for those doing distance calculations on those >> > documents passing the filter, it seems to come at a cost. >> >> Currently, this is only used for filtering. AIUI, Tiers aren't really >> that useful for distance calculations, are they? After all, all you have is >> a box id and you'd have to reverse out the calc of that to be able to calc a >> distance, no? Perhaps I'm missing something. >> > > How Spatial Lucene currently works (or at least one of the ways it was > designed to work), is using a 2 step filtering process. Step 1 is the > Cartesian Tier filtering. The resulting set of Documents is then passed on > through to Step 2 which then calculates the distance from each Document to > the search centre.
IMO, being able to just do a tier or bounding box filter is also useful (step 1). One example is if someone is going to sort by distance anyway... they may want to do only a bounding-box type filter for greater performance. We should keep both concepts (bounding box filter and distance filter) regardless of how the distance filter is implemented. -Yonik Apache Lucene Eurocon 2010 18-21 May 2010 | Prague --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
