Subject: Re: [geometry] Spatial Indexes: build and knn query performance for bulk loading/packing vs. linear balancing
From: Mikkel B. Stegmann (mikkel.stegmann_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-12 03:10:44
thanks a lot for your valuable and detailed input (in particular the Morton
code). Actually, R-trees weren't my first choice. But when I dived into the
Boost documentation I quickly became convinced that this is way to go for
now. My first first choice was in fact to build a simple spatial
partitioning myself, and it surely would have been fun :)
But the spatial indexes offers readily available support for rectangles, in
addition to various query features and future-proofing (for example w.r.t.
less homogenous point distributions) way beyond what I personally could
warrant to put into the project.
So in summary, my future needs extends well beyond knn-query of fairly
regular points. I'll stick to linear balancing for now, and re-evaluate the
facilities that spatial indexes provide, when I progress to more complex
problems. Thanks for educating me on this matter.
-- View this message in context: http://boost-geometry.203548.n3.nabble.com/Spatial-Indexes-build-and-knn-query-performance-for-bulk-loading-packing-vs-linear-balancing-tp4025741p4025751.html Sent from the Boost Geometry mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net