Here is an example I have tried. So let's assume that I want to checkIn on the 30th day, and leave on the 115th day.
My query would be: -availability_spatial:"Intersects( 30 0 3650 115 )" However, that wouldn't match anything. Here is an example document below so you can see. (I've not negated the spatial field in the filter query so you can see the field coordinates) In case the formatting is bad: See here http://pastie.org/pastes/8006249/text <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <response> <lst name="responseHeader" > <int name="status">0</int> <int name="QTime">1</int> <lst name="params"> < str name="fl">availability_spatial</str> <str name="indent">true</str> <str name="q">id:38197 </str> <str name="_">1370374172298</str> <str name="wt"> xml</str> <str name="fq">availability_spatial:"Intersects( 30 0 3650 115 )" </str> </lst> </lst> <result name="response" numFound="1" start="0"> <doc> < arr name="availability_spatial"> <str>147.6 163.4</str> <str>164.6 178.4</ str> <str>192.6 220.4</str> <str>241.6 264.4</str> </arr></doc> </result> </ response> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Chris Atkinson <chrisa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks David. > Query times are really quick and my index is only 20Mb now which is about > what I would expect. > I'm having some problems figuring out what type of query I want to find > *Available* properties with this new points system. > > > I'm storing bookings against each document. So I have X Y coordinates, > where X will be the check in of a previous booking, and Y will be the > departure. > > So for example illustrative purposes, a weeks booking from 10th January to > the 17th, would be X Y => 10 17 > > <field name="booking">10 17</field> > <field name="booking">22 27</field> > > I might have several bookings. > > Now, I want to find available properties with my search, but I'm just not > sure on the ordering of the end/start in the polygon Intersect. > > I've looked at this document very carefully and tried to draw it all out > on paper. > > https://people.apache.org/~hossman/spatial-for-non-spatial-meetup-20130117/ > > Here are the suggestions: > > q=fieldX:"Intersects(-∞ end start ∞)" > q=fieldX:"Intersects(-∞ start end ∞)" > q=fieldX:"Intersects(start -∞ ∞ end)" > > All of these, are great for finding the existance of a field coordinate, > but I need to make sure that the property is available. So I thought I > could use one of these three queries in the negative by using > -fieldX:"Inter...." but none of those work. > > Can you shine some light on what I might be missing? > What ordering would I want for *availability* > Thanks very much. > > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Smiley, David W. <dsmi...@mitre.org>wrote: > >> Hi Chris: >> >> Have you read: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialForTimeDurations >> You're modeling your data sub-optimally. Full precision rectangles >> (distErrPct=0) doesn't scale well and you're seeing that. You should >> represent your durations as a point and it will take up a fraction of the >> space (see above). Furthermore, because your detail gets into one digit >> to the right of the decimal, your maxDistErr should definitely be smaller >> than 1 -- use something like 0.5 (given you have two levels of precision >> below a full day) but to be safer (more certain it's not a problem) use >> 0.3 -- a little less. Please report back how that goes. >> >> ~ David >> >> On 6/3/13 7:27 AM, "Chris Atkinson" <chrisa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >Hi, >> >I'm seeing really slow query times. 7-25 seconds when I run a simple >> >filter >> >query that uses my SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType field. >> > >> >My index is about 30k documents. Prior to adding the Spatial field, the >> on >> >disk space was about 100Mb, so it's a really tiny index. Once I add the >> >spatial field (which is multi-values), the index size jumps up to 2GB. >> (Is >> >this normal?). >> > >> >Only about 10k documents will have any spatial data. Typically, they will >> >have at most 10 shapes each, but the majority are all one of two >> >rectangles. >> > >> >This is my fieldType definition. >> > >> > <fieldType name="date_availability" >> >class="solr.SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType" >> > geo="false" >> > worldBounds="0 0 3650 1" >> > distErrPct="0" >> > maxDistErr="1" >> > units="degrees" >> > /> >> > >> >And the field >> > >> > <field name="availability_spatial" type="date_availability" >> > indexed="true" stored="false" multiValued="true" /> >> > >> > >> >I am using the field to represent approximately 10 years after January >> 1st >> >2013, where each day is along the X-axis. Because the availability starts >> >and ends at 2pm and 10am, I was using a decimal place when creating my >> >shape to show that detail. (Is this approach wrong?) >> > >> >So a typical rectangle when indexed would be (minX minY maxX maxY) >> > >> >Rectangle 100.6 0 120.4 1 >> > >> >Is it wrong that my Y and X values are not of the same scale? Since I >> >don't >> >care about the Y axis at all, I just set it to be of 1 height always. >> > >> >I'm running Solr 4.3, with a small JVM of 768M (can be increased). And I >> >have 2GB RAM. (Again can be increased). >> > >> >Thanks >> >> >
