Thanks a lot Ignacio,
This does seem to work. I'm wondering why this is not part of the query
processing itself? Are there situations in which someone would not want
this behavior?
Tomas
On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 11:02 AM Ignacio Vera <iver...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That is actually expected as the query is trying to match the
> original point with the encoded point in the index, therefore is not
> matching. There are other cases where results are not as expected, for
> example if you index the points from a polygon and then you make a polygon
> query using that polygon, some of the points will intersect and some others
> won't.
>
> In order to avoid these cases, what I do is to quantize the query
> geometries (encode and decode all points). I found this is a more apple to
> apple comparison, and the results are closer to what I would expect.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Ignacio
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 10:02 PM Tomás Fernández Löbbe <
> tomasflo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> > I just noticed that If I add a document with a LatLonPoint field with a
> > latitude and longitude, and then I do a query using
> > "LatLonPoint.newGeometryQuery("location",
> > ShapeField.QueryRelation.INTERSECTS, new Point(latitude, longitude))"
> with
> > the same latitude and longitude it won't match. Is this expected? If I
> do a
> > Distance query instead, even with radius 0 the document will match.
> >
> > My test here:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/tflobbe/lucene/commit/a55e465a48dd8f5f978f4241a0a89e051044b6d3
> >
> > Tomas
> >
>
