5 ms·

> Why does everyone always seem to punt on doing geospatial right? It's not _that_ hard. Do you mean you think they don't know how to do it? As I followed the

> Why does everyone always seem to punt on doing geospatial right? It's not _that_ hard. Do you mean you think they don't know how to do it? As I followed the roadmap on this specific point, it looks more like an incremental development to me: they first used rectangular coordinates in 1.6, then a spherical model in 1.7 etc. It allows to bring a more lightweight solution quickly to people that need it (like me), then to evolve based on the feedback etc.

crux_ 16y ago
The problem I have is at least partly one of truth in advertising. For example: If they were truly using a "spherical model", then one would not expect to have queries fail at the poles & dateline, would you? At least it is documented and fails hard with an error rather than giving wrong results, so a developer can quickly figure out the weak spots --- though I bet a lot of people would prefer the wrong results to queries that cause exceptions in their systems. > Do you mean you think they don't know how to do it? I think it has more to do with the absurdly low bar they've set for themselves to check the "geospatial" box than it does with competence.
- thibaut_barrere 16y ago
  I don't know really - if limitations are documented like they are apparently, it's really not an issue for me - I don't feel cheated (but it's really an opinion!). Your mileage may vary as they say: I used the GIS since 1.6 and it was very helpful for me in this form already :)
  - crux_ 16y ago
    The limitations are documented as foot/side notes. Analogy: It's like seeing "ACID compliance!" on a feature list, then finding buried in the documentation that is only the case for single-document transactions in unordered collections on a single machine only. The new feature might be useful to some but including it on a feature list without disclaimer is misleading.
    - thibaut_barrere 16y ago
      I understand your analogy really :) Really curious: are you using mongo currently? Or browsing the docs?
      - crux_ 16y ago
        I'm not using it directly, but sometimes I use tools that in turn use mongo. -- So for now, browsing docs.

crux_ 16y ago

The problem I have is at least partly one of truth in advertising. For example: If they were truly using a "spherical model", then one would not expect to have queries fail at the poles & dateline, would you? At least it is documented and fails hard with an error rather than giving wrong results, so a developer can quickly figure out the weak spots --- though I bet a lot of people would prefer the wrong results to queries that cause exceptions in their systems. > Do you mean you think they don't know how to do it? I think it has more to do with the absurdly low bar they've set for themselves to check the "geospatial" box than it does with competence.

thibaut_barrere 16y ago
I don't know really - if limitations are documented like they are apparently, it's really not an issue for me - I don't feel cheated (but it's really an opinion!). Your mileage may vary as they say: I used the GIS since 1.6 and it was very helpful for me in this form already :)
- crux_ 16y ago
  The limitations are documented as foot/side notes. Analogy: It's like seeing "ACID compliance!" on a feature list, then finding buried in the documentation that is only the case for single-document transactions in unordered collections on a single machine only. The new feature might be useful to some but including it on a feature list without disclaimer is misleading.
  - thibaut_barrere 16y ago
    I understand your analogy really :) Really curious: are you using mongo currently? Or browsing the docs?
    - crux_ 16y ago
      I'm not using it directly, but sometimes I use tools that in turn use mongo. -- So for now, browsing docs.