lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Karl Wright (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-7150) geo3d public APIs should match the 2D apis?
Date Tue, 29 Mar 2016 22:00:26 GMT


Karl Wright commented on LUCENE-7150:

It escapes me why degrees and distance in meters is a "natural" measurement.  To me, that's
an arbitrary decision that somebody made (here).  The distance in meters as being the way
you specify radii of circles is the most problematic.

But I fully understand that Lucene has already decided what units it intends to use and Geo3d
in its current form is incompatible with that.  And yet, "meters" implies a surface distance
and geo3d doesn't even have a concept of surface distance.  You could describe radii in degrees
and that could match, but that's not compatible with the 2D implementation.

So should I withdraw this contribution entirely?  What is your suggestion?

> geo3d public APIs should match the 2D apis?
> -------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-7150
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
> I'm struggling to benchmark the equivalent to {{LatLonPoint.newDistanceQuery}} in the
geo3d world.
> Ideally, I think we'd have a {{Geo3DPoint.newDistanceQuery}}?  And it would take degrees,
not radians, and radiusMeters, not an angle?
> And if I index and search using {{PlanetModel.SPHERE}} I think it should ideally give
the same results as {{LatLonPoint.newDistanceQuery}}, which uses haversin.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message