From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
To: Mark Stosberg <mark@summersault.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: optimizing a geo_distance() proximity query
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:22:09 -0600
Message-ID: <20070205202209.GA20382@wolff.to> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eq81l5$2na3$1@news.hub.org>
References: <eq2m5o$8cr$1@sea.gmane.org>
<20070204051644.GA3754@wolff.to>
<eq81l5$2na3$1@news.hub.org>
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 14:47:25 -0500,
Mark Stosberg <mark@summersault.com> wrote:
>
> This is also interesting. Is this approach practical if I want to index
> what's near each of about 40,000 US zipcodes, or the approach mostly
> useful if you there are just a small number of fixed points to address?
I think the answer depends on what your data model is. If you treat each
zip code as having a location at a single point, the earth distance stuff
should work. If you are trying to include the shape of each zip code in
your model and measure distances to the nearest point of zip codes, then
you will probably be better off using postgis.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: bruno@wolff.to, mark@summersault.com
Subject: Re: optimizing a geo_distance() proximity query
In-Reply-To: <20070205202209.GA20382@wolff.to>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox