Jackie-Jiang commented on PR #8620: URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8620#issuecomment-1118872760
> > Then my suggestion is to remove the geometry check in the `StContainsFunction`, and we should document the behavior of using geometry contains for geography objects, which can give good estimation on small areas. We should also add a TODO to support accurate contains on geography objects in the future. > > thanks Jackie and Yupeng. just curious why it is not accurate? My use case is checking all the coordinates inside a city polygon (like SF). is it small area or big area for a city like SF? IMO a single city on the earth sphere can be considered small area. I can see one exception area around longitude of -180/180, where geography and geometry will give very different result (in geography, -179.9 to 179.9 is a short distance, but in geometry that is a whole circle of the sphere). In other areas treating geography as geometry should give close approximation. @yupeng9 What do you think if we allow `ST_Contains` and `ST_Within` on geography but use the geometry algorithm? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@pinot.apache.org
