Speed: geopoly_overlap() or geopoly_within() VS. using R*Tree directly?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Speed: geopoly_overlap() or geopoly_within() VS. using R*Tree directly?

Robert M. Münch
Hi, when doing 2D hit-testing with only rectangular areas, is it faster to use the geopoly extension and functions or is the bare R*Tree extension faster?

--

Robert M. Münch

_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

signature.asc (887 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Speed: geopoly_overlap() or geopoly_within() VS. using R*Tree directly?

Richard Hipp-3
On 2/25/19, Robert M. Münch <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi, when doing 2D hit-testing with only rectangular areas, is it faster to
> use the geopoly extension and functions or is the bare R*Tree extension
> faster?

My guess would be bare R*Tree extension, but I have not run the experiment.

--
D. Richard Hipp
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users