Honestly I'm more focused on intelligent ways to do faster and more complex GIS features. As I said the most time consuming part is the DistainceFilter, which is required to sort by distance. I'm playing with several ideas on how to do those better, and get a win there.
However if anyone wants to jump in and try other improvements feel free. On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > Have you thought about subclassing MultiTermQuery and provide a > FilteredTermEnum? When you do this, the query can be either BooleanQuery or > a Filter. > > ----- > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: patrick o'leary [mailto:pj...@pjaol.com] > > Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 3:33 AM > > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Re: LocalLucene/Lucene Spatial > > > > 1) The only reason for ConstantScoreQuery is because it lets me convert > > the > > LocalLucene filter to a query. > > > > 2) TierRangeQuery- not at the moment, we're not really doing a range > > search, > > we're pulling predefined id's (e.g. a shape) from the index using the > term > > enumerator. > > > > Average time take for a bounding box shape lookup is in the order of 3 to > > 4 > > ms, repeating that with a lat / long bounding box, and your looking at > > 100+ > > ms. Been there, done that. > > > > As for bitsets, I'm looking at openbitset, but the getDocSetId is causing > > me > > some problems with a QueryWrapperFilter, where I'm intersecting the text > > search with the bounding shape > > filter pre-distance filter.. > > > > The reality is the heaviest part is the DistanceFilter- not the bounding > > box > > part. > > > > On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 8:06 PM, John Wang <john.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Is there a reason the Query build is from a bitset via a > > ConstantScoreQuery > > > instead a RangeQuery? Seems we would be paying a penalty for loading > the > > > bitset, esp the bitset would be rather sparse. > > > > > > Furthermore, is TrieRangeQuery planning to be somehow used in the > > spatial > > > package? > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > -John > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > In the trunk, see contrib/spatial. I believe it is all committed and > > > being > > > > worked on by interested contributors: > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/trunk/contrib/spatial/ > > > > > > > > -Grant > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 2009, at 12:05 PM, Jamie Johnson wrote: > > > > > > > > I am working on a project that is already using Lucene (through > > > Hibernate > > > >> Search) to perform full text queries and have since come across > > several > > > >> sites with information about LocalLucene/Lucene Spatial. I was > > > wondering > > > >> if > > > >> there was a timeline for having this work implemented that anyone > was > > > >> aware > > > >> of? > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
