API, Core: Geospatial bounds and spatial predicates #12667
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds support for parsing and serializing geospatial bounds, partially implementing the iceberg geo spec: #10981. It also resolved remaining review comments in #12346.
2 spatial predicates were added to operate on geospatial bounds:
ST_INTERSECTS
: Test if 2 geospatial bounds intersects with each otherST_DISJOINT
: The negation ofST_INTERSECTS
.A new subclass of
BoundPredicate
namedBoundGeospatialPredicate
was added to represent bound geospatial predicates.BoundGeospatialPredicate
do not support evaluating on WKB encoded geometry/geography values, handling of geospatial predicates were implemented by expression visitors to support metrics evaluation on geospatial bounds.I can divide geospatial bound classes and spatial predicates into 2 PRs, but I'd like to know if my approach of adding geospatial predicates is OK before proceeding.