Search Results

Beside what is already said: It is not the computional cost of st_transform that is the problem, but that it will kill the index. About st_buffer approach: it is not ST_Intersects that is costly (a …

The easiest way I can think of to get a correct answer is to use the point that you have found with ST_Intersection, build a vertical line through that and find where that line intersects with the lin …

In PostGIS it is the real geometries that is compared. First it sorts out all overlapping boundin boxes, with index if present. Then it compares the real geometries of the candidates.

What you want is a pivot table. You can create that with the pivot functionality in PostgreSQL, but I think it is easier to create it like this in your case: SELECT m.id, (length_type='00'):: …

If I understand you right your problem is the pointonsurface. That point will intersect only 1 polygon in table t. Use the full polygon instead. Just remove the pointonsurface function.

This is a little trickier than you might expect. That is because there is no good way in analyzing relations for more than pairs. You cannot put three lines into a function and ask if all of them inte …

There you also have the geodetic calculations of intersection if you need it. Update: I read your question again and realised that you are not using the linestring the trac forms but each vertex. … At the other hand, if you are doing this much of the work in your own code, why don't you do the intersection test too. …

You are right that dumping the multipolygons to polygons makes the index more efficient, for the reason you mention. So if the size of the dataset makes performance an issue you should: dump the mu …

The reason it doesn't work with "not intersects" is that you only compare geometries in pairs; there will be the same problem with disjoint. Every housepoint will disjoint some parcels even if it inte …