4 ms·
> Do you have an example query? I mean, just about any geospatial query? E.g. finding all polygons in a table that overlap with one specified in a query. https
by anarazel 7y ago
> Do you have an example query?
I mean, just about any geospatial query? E.g. finding all polygons in a table that overlap with one specified in a query. https://postgis.net/docs/ST_Overlaps.html https://postgis.net/docs/ST_Overlaps.html
> If you're not using geospatial features,
Why are you talking about not using geospatial features? I was just responding to your
> Even if they didn't, there are plenty of algorithms based on lat/lon which uses numeric/float data types with simple indexes.
statement. Which I still think is not a meaningful alternative. And then subsequently to your statement about vectorized columnstores.
I'm not all saying that only postgres has geospatial indexing support (although postgis is pretty good) - that would be ridiculous.
> then what indexes does PG offer that the others can't match (either directly with indexes or with better scan/query performance)?
I do think that postgres' indexing support (gist, gin in particular) makes it easier to add support for indexing types of data that are harder to index in many other databases. But it's nothing that can't be beat.
- manigandham 7y agoThe point is that without geospatial features, you can still use other strategies like lat/long or geohash and they will all have the same performance. The logic (built-in geospatial or hand-written sql) is irrelevant to the performance comparison and GP's post that Postgres was the only one that could query quickly. Do you disagree with that? If not then I'm not sure what your argument is.