On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Konrad Garus <konrad.ga...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/2/16 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >> "Konrad Garus" <konrad.ga...@gmail.com> writes: >>> && operator seems to be broken for polygons whose bounding boxes intersect: >> >>> select polygon'((0,0), (1,2), (0,2))' && polygon'((0.5, 0), (1,0), (1,1))'; >>> ?column? >>> ---------- >>> t >>> (1 row) >> >> This is fixed as of 9.0; see the release notes at >> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/release-9-0.html >> which say >> >> Correct calculations of "overlaps" and "contains" operations for >> polygons (Teodor Sigaev) >> >> The polygon && (overlaps) operator formerly just checked to see >> if the two polygons' bounding boxes overlapped. It now does a >> more correct check. The polygon @> and <@ (contains/contained >> by) operators formerly checked to see if one polygon's vertexes >> were all contained in the other; this can wrongly report "true" >> for some non-convex polygons. Now they check that all line >> segments of one polygon are contained in the other. > > Thank you. How about the point of more informative docs that would > explain supported types, automatic conversions and all such caveats > (also for 8.3 and 8.4)?
I think a lot of these things are already documented. Aren't they? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
