From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-17 19:49:11
"Jose" <jmalv04_at_[hidden]> wrote
> Given the problems with the datasets, I would change the initial query to
> one that clusters the cities as you do and show only the city + (lat,long)
> and number of neighbours in the query results. Some cities will show with
> the right string and others not given that the data doesn't map all
> coordinates to the same city name.
> RTL result is also 991 neighbours. The problem is that the Amsterdam area
> has the 991 neighbours (and most likely all AS with the same identical
> coordinates) so it is better to group the results by city i.e.:
> Amsterdam (lata, lonb) 991
> city B (latc,lond) xyz
> city C (late, lonf) abc
> With these results we can compare both queries and although the string
> from the cities my differ the numerical values should not.
Well, this may make more sence (depending on what you want to find out).
However, this is a much simpler query -- just sort on the sity, groupby, and
then re-sort on the counter -- I am sure both libraries will be efficient
Also I don't think one can specify (lat, lon) for a city.
I would finish with the original example before we proceed to anything else.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk