I was running the wrong query for the 3D case. I've updated the benchmark gist and added some test under PostGIS 1.5.
On Thursday, August 9, 2012 4:03:45 PM UTC-5, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > > On 9 elo, 23:48, Jeremy Dunck <jdu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm fairly familiar with the django gis code, but I haven't been > > following postgis 2.0. Could you point me towards some discussion of > > the index changes from 1.5 to 2.0? On the face of it, I'm doubtful > > that they've removed a useful form of indexing with no > > replacement/alternative. > > > > It's hard for me to assess the patch w/o some more context re. the > > upstream postgis changes. > > The only thing I have is this link in the ticket: > http://blog.opengeo.org/2012/03/13/postgis-2-0-new-features-3d4d-indexing/ > and then this link leads to this discussion: > > http://postgis.refractions.net/pipermail/postgis-devel/2010-December/011178.html > > > My understanding of the issue: It seems one index type isn't available > (at least not with the same name) in 2.0 compared to 1.5. This is the > whole incompatibility problem from Django code perspective. The 2d > index seems to be somewhat slower than the 1.5 version (at least as of > December 2010). For this reason the whole index isn't created. > > So, there are actually two questions: > - is there a better index for the 2d case > - if not, shouldn't we still create the somewhat slower index, which > could still be orders of magnitude faster than no index at all. > > - Anssi > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/3ii3nqndzyoJ. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
