> On 11 Aug 2017, at 16:30, Thijs van den Berg wrote:
>
>>
>> On 11 Aug 2017, at 16:28, Sandro Santilli wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:16:44PM +0200, Thijs van den Berg wrote:
>>> Excellent!
>>> Thanks for helping me understand, very clear.
>>>
>>> That makes me think there is no
> On 11 Aug 2017, at 16:28, Sandro Santilli wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:16:44PM +0200, Thijs van den Berg wrote:
>> Excellent!
>> Thanks for helping me understand, very clear.
>>
>> That makes me think there is no way around this, considering I want/need to
>> use GIST indices to s
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:16:44PM +0200, Thijs van den Berg wrote:
> Excellent!
> Thanks for helping me understand, very clear.
>
> That makes me think there is no way around this, considering I want/need to
> use GIST indices to speedup these type of queries? If I did the following
> type of
Excellent!
Thanks for helping me understand, very clear.
That makes me think there is no way around this, considering I want/need to use
GIST indices to speedup these type of queries? If I did the following type of
query (which *does* give the intended result) then it looks like it’s doing a
Hi!
These are bbox operations, and IIRC they operate on float (32bit) bbox of
geometry. I think conversion of point to bbox adds some epsilon around a
point.
пт, 11 авг. 2017 г. в 16:57, Thijs van den Berg :
> Hi All,
>
> I'm getting some strange results that I can’t explain. Maybe some of you
>
Hi All,
I'm getting some strange results that I can’t explain. Maybe some of you know
whats going on?
I want to use PostGIS for spatial queries on scientific data (2d point sets).
In the following query I want to select points to the left of some other point
but it looks like there is some rou
