I've been considering a use-case with a dictionary-encoded struct
column, which may contain some dictionary-encoded columns itself. More
specifically, in this use-case each row represents a single observation
in a geospatial track, which includes a position, a time, and some
track-level metadata (track id, origin, destination, etc...). I would
like to represent the metadata as a dictionary-encoded struct, since
unique values will be repeated for each observation of that track, and I
would _also_ like to dictionary-encode some of the metadata column's
children, since unique values will typically be repeated in multiple tracks.
I think one could make a (totally legitimate) argument that this is
stretching a format designed for tabular data too far. This use-case
could also be accomplished by breaking out the struct metadata column
into its own arrow table, and managing a new integer column that
references that table. This would look almost identical to what I
initially described, it just wouldn't rely on the arrow libraries to
manage the "dictionary".
The spec doesn't have anything to say on this topic as far as I can
tell, but our implementations don't currently allow a dictionary-encoded
column's children to be dictionary-encoded themselves [1]. Is this just
a simplifying assumption, or a hard rule that should be codified in the
spec?
Thanks,
Brian
[1]
https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/master/cpp/src/arrow/ipc/metadata-internal.cc#L824
- Allow dictionary-encoded children? Brian Hulette
-