[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7168?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15229250#comment-15229250
]
Karl Wright commented on LUCENE-7168:
-------------------------------------
[~mikemccand]: The problem is that the "wee little box" doesn't actually seem
to intersect with the surface of the world at all. So the point can be in the
box, and it can be within the shape (because that's described by planes), but
since it's off the surface of the world we don't detect these as intersecting
anywhere on the surface. We need the surface points of intersection in order
to evaluate the kind of intersection that is present.
So if my analysis is correct, this isn't a bug, per se, since there's really no
intersection. But it's a problem, no question.
Do you have a concept of a minimum-sized box? That may be the way to go. The
minimum would want to be twice the size of the largest possible numerical
rounding delta, or something like that. If a box gets to be that size and
still overlaps then you'd have to check the remaining individual items against
the shape. Let me think it through, though, to be sure that's the right
approach.
> Remove geo3d test leniency
> --------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7168
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7168
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Attachments: LUCENE-7168.patch, LUCENE-7168.patch, LUCENE-7168.patch,
> LUCENE-7168.patch, LUCENE-7168.patch
>
>
> Today the test hides possible failures by leniently handling quantization
> issues.
> We should fix it to do what geo2d tests now do: pre-quantized indexed points,
> but don't quantize query shapes.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
