Good catch. I found the ticket that’s aim is to integrate the full-text search 
indexes with the virtual page memory architecture.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5371 
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5371>

Sergi, do we have a similar one for the geo-spatial?

—
Denis
 
> On Jun 1, 2017, at 2:12 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Same think stays for the full-text indexes which are currently stored in
> Lucene.
> 
> 2017-05-24 21:56 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]>:
> 
>> Sergi,
>> 
>> While we are figuring this out, what happens to the GeoSpatial
>> functionality in the mean time? Is it going to work at all? If not, should
>> we throw some sort of exception?
>> 
>> D.
>> 
>> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Though this may require some changes in BPlusTree. Let me think.
>>> 
>>> Sergi
>>> 
>>> 2017-05-24 8:58 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]>:
>>> 
>>>> It must not be too hard to implement kd-tree over b+tree [1]. Depending
>>> on
>>>> level we have to compare either X or Y coordinate.
>>>> 
>>>> I think we will even have a performance boost for spatial indexes after
>>>> this change.
>>>> 
>>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-d_tree
>>>> 
>>>> Sergi
>>>> 
>>>> 2017-05-23 18:59 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda <[email protected]>:
>>>> 
>>>>> +1
>>>>> 
>>>>> This looks natural considering that we switched to the new memory
>>>>> architecture. Sergi, how difficult is to support this?
>>>>> 
>>>>> —
>>>>> Denis
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On May 23, 2017, at 4:25 AM, Sergi Vladykin <
>> [email protected]
>>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Guys,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Looks like we have to move our geospatial indexes to the new
>> approach
>>>>> with
>>>>>> BPlusTree. Right now it stores data in Java heap. This is especially
>>>>>> important because we are going to have a persistence layer donated
>> by
>>>>>> GridGain and obviously geo spatial indexes will not work with it at
>>> all.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sergi
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Reply via email to