On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 20:38:51 +0200,
Olivier Chaussavoine wrote:
I also look at cube extension, but the built in type box - a couple of
points - does not require any extension and has a GIST index. It can be
used to represent a rectangle on the domain [-PI/2,+PI/2[*[-PI,PI[. If the
extensio
I also look at cube extension, but the built in type box - a couple of
points - does not require any extension and has a GIST index. It can be
used to represent a rectangle on the domain [-PI/2,+PI/2[*[-PI,PI[. If the
extension was providing a function get_rect_from_cap() giving the smallest
rectan
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 12:18:48 +0200,
Olivier Chaussavoine wrote:
I did not found any geographic indexing with earthdistance, and need it.
Some of the earthdistance stuff is based on cube which does have indexing.
I don't know how well that indexing works and it might be pretty bad in
pr
M
To: John R Pierce
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] earthdistance
As a simple potential user, I tried to install PostGIS, downloaded all
libraries required: proj-4.8.0,
gdal-1.10.0,json-c,postgis-2.0.3,geos-3.3.8,libwml2-2.9.0, and tried to build
the first library with
vier Chaussavoine [olivier.chaussavo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 10:17 PM
To: John R Pierce
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] earthdistance
As a simple potential user, I tried to install PostGIS, downloaded all
libraries required: proj-4.8.0,
gdal-1.10.0,json-c,pos
I did not found any geographic indexing with earthdistance, and need it.
The need I have is simple:
"is the distance between two (lat,long) positions less than X km?"
the model used for the shape of the earth should be related to the
precision of lat,lon, and most sources are imprecise. The spheri
As a simple potential user, I tried to install PostGIS, downloaded all
libraries required: proj-4.8.0,
gdal-1.10.0,json-c,postgis-2.0.3,geos-3.3.8,libwml2-2.9.0, and tried to
build the first library with the simple procedure:
./configure
make
make install
I had a fatal error:
make[2]: entrant da
To calculate geographic distances, a great circle route calculation is used.
This is not the same thing as the simple calculation for distances between two
points on a sphere.
In order to perform the calculation, various model parameters must be chosen,
such as the ellipsoidal reference model.
On 8/9/2013 5:18 PM, Brent Wood wrote:
You might install Postgis to implement very powerful spatial functionality that
can easily do what you are asking (plus a whole lot more).
indeed, PostGIS is the logical answer, but the OP specifically stated he
wanted the functionality without 'sophist
How accurate do you need it? My website has a lot of "local" listing stuff
based on a distance from the viewer and I use the earthdistance module in
contrib to do it.
Given, it's not accurate enough to calculate a surgical missile strike, but
for "within 20 miles" type of things it's good eno
You might install Postgis to implement very powerful spatial functionality that
can easily do what you are asking (plus a whole lot more).
http://www.postgis.org
Now that v2 installs as a Postgres extension, it is more closely coupled with
the underlying database.
Brent Wood
Programme leader:
On 06/18/2013 11:16 AM, Jeff Herrin wrote:
I don't need it to be too accurate. We're pushing hotel info into the
GDS (sabre, expedia, orbitz, etc). They require airport info relative
to the hotel. Example: DFW is 25 miles NW of the property. I thought
about just faking it...comparing the hotel'
On 6/18/2013 11:16 AM, Jeff Herrin wrote:
I don't need it to be too accurate. We're pushing hotel info into the
GDS (sabre, expedia, orbitz, etc). They require airport info relative
to the hotel. Example: DFW is 25 miles NW of the property. I thought
about just faking it...comparing the hotel's
uot;Jeff Herrin" mailto:j...@openhotel.com)>
> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org (mailto:pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:37:10 AM
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] earthdistance compass bearing
>
> On 06/18/2013 10:42 AM, Jeff Herrin wrote:
> > I'm tryin
ich im not seeing in earthdistance). I guess I'm going
to have to either setup postGIS or brush up on my trig.
thanks,
altimage
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Crawford"
To: "Jeff Herrin"
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:37:10 AM
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Jeff Herrin wrote:
> I'm trying to get a compass bearing (N,S,NW,etc) using earthdistance. I can
> successfully get the distance between 2 points using either the point or
> cube method, but I've been struggling with getting the bearing. Any tips?
convert the cod
On 06/18/2013 10:42 AM, Jeff Herrin wrote:
I'm trying to get a compass bearing (N,S,NW,etc) using earthdistance.
I can successfully get the distance between 2 points using either the
point or cube method, but I've been struggling with getting the
bearing. Any tips?
PostGIS has some functions
On 6/18/2013 10:42 AM, Jeff Herrin wrote:
I'm trying to get a compass bearing (N,S,NW,etc) using earthdistance.
I can successfully get the distance between 2 points using either the
point or cube method, but I've been struggling with getting the
bearing. Any tips?
calculating the angle betwee
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 08:52:55 +0200,
Holger Klawitter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sunday 03 October 2004 20:22, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > Latitudes greater than 90 degrees have a reasonable
> > meaning and it can be useful to use 0 to 1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> I've never seen this, but at a guess it could mean starting with 0 at
> one pole and counting to 180 at the other.
Yes, that makes sense; thanks!
But this scheme will certainly not be compatible to the distance fomula :-)
Mit freundlichem Gruß / W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 03 October 2004 20:22, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> Latitudes greater than 90 degrees have a reasonable
> meaning and it can be useful to use 0 to 180 instead of -90 to 90.
Just a curious question: What is 100°N latitude supposed to mean?
Mit f
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 11:36:20 -0400,
Jean-Luc Lachance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree, NS or EW long lat should be the same.
> I was just pointing to the wrong figure. Also, if ll_to_earth takes lat
> first, it should report an error for a |lat| > 90...
I disagree with this. Latitudes
I agree, NS or EW long lat should be the same.
I was just pointing to the wrong figure. Also, if ll_to_earth takes lat
first, it should report an error for a |lat| > 90...
Michael Fuhr wrote:
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 09:29:16PM -0400, Jean-Luc Lachance wrote:
Maybe it would work with the right lo
> select
> earth_distance(ll_to_earth('122.55688','45.513746'),ll_to_earth('122.396357','47.648845'));
>
> The result I get is this:
>
> 128862.563227506
>
> The distance from Portland to Seattle is not 128862
> miles.
It is 128000m = 128km.
Welcome to the metric system :)
Bye, Chris.
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mike cox) writes:
> I'm running PostgreSQL 8.0 beta 1. I'm using the
> earthdistance to find the distance between two
> different latitude and logitude locations.
> Unfortunately, the result seems to be wrong.
>
> Here is what I'm doing:
> select
> earth_distance(ll_to_earth(
Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What *does* matter is that one specify (lat, lon) instead of
> (lon, lat):
The earthdistance README does specify that latitude is the first
argument, but it doesn't get the function name right :-( ... it
says ll_to_cube instead of ll_to_earth. Anyone wan
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 09:29:16PM -0400, Jean-Luc Lachance wrote:
> Maybe it would work with the right long & lat...
> try
> Protland OR -122.67555, 45.51184
> Seattle WA -122.32956, 47.60342
It doesn't matter which hemisphere the longitudes are in as long
as they're in the same hemisphere:
test
Maybe it would work with the right long & lat...
try
Protland OR -122.67555, 45.51184
Seattle WA -122.32956, 47.60342
Also, do not forget that it is the line distance not the driving distance.
Michael Fuhr wrote:
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 07:09:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
mike cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 17:55:31 -0600,
Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 07:09:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > mike cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The distance from Portland to Seattle is not 128862
> > > miles.
> >
> > How about 128.8 kilometers? The ear
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 07:09:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> mike cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The distance from Portland to Seattle is not 128862
> > miles.
>
> How about 128.8 kilometers? The earthdistance docs say it's in meters
> unless you've redefined the base unit.
128.8 kilometers
mike cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The distance from Portland to Seattle is not 128862
> miles.
How about 128.8 kilometers? The earthdistance docs say it's in meters
unless you've redefined the base unit.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast
31 matches
Mail list logo
