I'm investigating a possible Parquet-related compatibility bug that I encountered through some routine testing / benchmarking. I'll report back once I figure out what is going on (if anything)
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 11:51 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> It's ideal if your GPG key is in the web of trust (i.e. you can get it >> signed by another PMC member), but is not 100% essential. > > That won't be an option for me this week (it seems like I would need to meet > one face-to-face). I'll try to get the GPG checked in and the rest of the > pre-requisites done tomorrow (Monday) to hopefully start the release on > Tuesday (hopefully we can solve the last blocker/integration tests by then). > > On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 7:12 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> It's ideal if your GPG key is in the web of trust (i.e. you can get it >> signed by another PMC member), but is not 100% essential. >> >> Speaking of the release, there are at least 2 code changes I still >> want to get in >> >> ARROW-5717 >> ARROW-6353 >> >> I just pushed updates to ARROW-5717, will merge once the build is green. >> >> There are a couple of Rust patches still marked for 0.15. The rest >> seems to be documentation and a couple of integration test failures we >> should see about fixing in time. >> >> On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 11:26 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > Thanks Krisztián and Wes, >> > I've gone ahead and started registering myself on all the packaging sites. >> > >> > Is there any review process when adding my GPG key to the SVN file? [1] >> > doesn't seem to mention explicitly. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Micah >> > >> > [1] https://www.apache.org/dev/version-control.html#https-svn >> > >> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 5:01 PM Krisztián Szűcs <szucs.kriszt...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 5:52 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 12:13 AM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >> The process should be well documented at this point but there are a >> > >> >> number of steps. >> > >> > >> > >> > Is [1] the up-to-date documentation for the release? Are there >> > >> instructions for the adding the code signing Key to SVN? >> > >> > >> > >> > I will make a go of it. i will try to mitigate any internet issues by >> > >> doing the process for a cloud instance (I assume that isn't a problem?). >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> Setting up a new cloud environment suitable for producing an RC may be >> > >> time consuming, but you are welcome to try. Krisztian -- are you >> > >> available next week to help Micah and potentially take over producing >> > >> the RC if there are issues? >> > >> >> > > Sure, I'll be available next week. We can also grant access to >> > > https://github.com/ursa-labs/crossbow because configuring all >> > > the CI backends can be time consuming. >> > > >> > >> >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Micah >> > >> > >> > >> > [1] >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ARROW/Release+Management+Guide >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 8:29 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >> The process should be well documented at this point but there are a >> > >> >> number of steps. Note that you need to add your code signing key to >> > >> >> the KEYS file in SVN (that's not very hard to do). I think it's fine >> > >> >> to hand off the process to others after the VOTE but it would be >> > >> >> tricky to have multiple RMs involved with producing the source and >> > >> >> binary artifacts for the vote >> > >> >> >> > >> >> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:55 PM Micah Kornfield < >> > >> emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > SGTM, as well. >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > I should have a little bit of time next week if I can help as RM >> > >> >> > but >> > >> I have >> > >> >> > a couple of concerns: >> > >> >> > 1. In the past I've had trouble downloading and validating >> > >> releases. I'm a >> > >> >> > bit worried, that I might have similar problems doing the necessary >> > >> uploads. >> > >> >> > 2. My internet connection will likely be not great, I don't know >> > >> >> > if >> > >> this >> > >> >> > would make it even less likely to be successful. >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > Does it become problematic if somehow I would have to abandon the >> > >> process >> > >> >> > mid-release? Is there anyone who could serve as a backup? Are the >> > >> steps >> > >> >> > well documented? >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > Thanks, >> > >> >> > Micah >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:25 PM Neal Richardson < >> > >> neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > > Sounds good to me. >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > Do we have a release manager yet? Any volunteers? >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > Neal >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:06 PM Wes McKinney >> > >> >> > > <wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > > hi all, >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > It looks like we're drawing close to be able to make the 0.15.0 >> > >> >> > > > release. I would suggest "pencils down" at the end of this week >> > >> and >> > >> >> > > > see if a release candidate can be produced next Monday >> > >> >> > > > September >> > >> 23. >> > >> >> > > > Any thoughts or objections? >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > Thanks, >> > >> >> > > > Wes >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:23 AM Wes McKinney < >> > >> wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > > wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > hi Eric -- yes, that's correct. I'm planning to amend the >> > >> Format docs >> > >> >> > > > > today regarding the EOS issue and also update the C++ library >> > >> >> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:21 AM Eric Erhardt >> > >> >> > > > > <eric.erha...@microsoft.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > I assume the plan is to merge the >> > >> ARROW-6313-flatbuffer-alignment >> > >> >> > > > branch into master before the 0.15 release, correct? >> > >> >> > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > BTW - I believe the C# alignment changes are ready to be >> > >> merged into >> > >> >> > > > the alignment branch - >> > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/5280/ >> > >> >> > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > Eric >> > >> >> > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > >> >> > > > > > From: Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 10:24 PM >> > >> >> > > > > > To: Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > > > > > Cc: dev <dev@arrow.apache.org>; niki.lj >> > >> >> > > > > > <niki...@aliyun.com> >> > >> >> > > > > > Subject: Re: Timeline for 0.15.0 release >> > >> >> > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > I should have a little more bandwidth to help with some of >> > >> the >> > >> >> > > > packaging starting tomorrow and going into the weekend. >> > >> >> > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > On Tuesday, September 10, 2019, Wes McKinney < >> > >> wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > > > wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > Hi folks, >> > >> >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > With the state of nightly packaging and integration >> > >> >> > > > > > > builds >> > >> things >> > >> >> > > > > > > aren't looking too good for being in release readiness by >> > >> the end >> > >> >> > > of >> > >> >> > > > > > > this week but maybe I'm wrong. I'm planning to be working >> > >> to close >> > >> >> > > as >> > >> >> > > > > > > many issues as I can and also to help with the ongoing >> > >> alignment >> > >> >> > > > fixes. >> > >> >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > Wes >> > >> >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019, 11:07 PM Micah Kornfield < >> > >> >> > > emkornfi...@gmail.com >> > >> >> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >> Just for reference [1] has a dashboard of the current >> > >> issues: >> > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwi >> > >> >> > > > > > >> ki.apache.org >> > >> >> > > > %2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FARROW%2FArrow%2B0.15.0%2BRelea >> > >> >> > > > > > >> se&data=02%7C01%7CEric.Erhardt%40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbead81a42104034 >> > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> a4f308d736678a45%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C6370376 >> > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> 90648216338&sdata=0Upux3i%2B9X6f8uanGKSGM5VYxR6c2ADWrxSPi1%2FgbH4 >> > >> >> > > > > > >> %3D&reserved=0 >> > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 3:43 PM Wes McKinney < >> > >> wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > > > wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> hi all, >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> It doesn't seem like we're going to be in a position to >> > >> release >> > >> >> > > at >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> the beginning of next week. I hope that one more week >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> of >> > >> work (or >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> less) will be enough to get us there. Aside from >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> merging >> > >> the >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> alignment changes, we need to make sure that our >> > >> packaging jobs >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> required for the release candidate are all working. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> If folks could remove issues from the 0.15.0 backlog >> > >> that they >> > >> >> > > > don't >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> think they will finish by end of next week that would >> > >> help focus >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> efforts (there are currently 78 issues in 0.15.0 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> still). >> > >> I am >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> looking to tackle a few small features related to >> > >> dictionaries >> > >> >> > > > while >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> the release window is still open. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> - Wes >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 3:48 PM Wes McKinney < >> > >> >> > > wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > hi, >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > I think we should try to release the week of >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > September >> > >> 9, so >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > development work should be completed by end of next >> > >> week. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > Does that seem reasonable? >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > I plan to get up a patch for the protocol alignment >> > >> changes for >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > C++ in the next couple of days -- I think that >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > getting >> > >> the >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > alignment work done is the main barrier to releasing. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > Thanks >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > Wes >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 12:25 PM Ji Liu >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > <niki...@aliyun.com.invalid> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > Hi, Wes, on the java side, I can think of several >> > >> bugs that >> > >> >> > > > need >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > to >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> be fixed or reminded. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > i. ARROW-6040: Dictionary entries are required in >> > >> IPC streams >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > even >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> when empty[1] >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > This one is under review now, however through this >> > >> PR we find >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > that >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> there seems a bug in java reading and writing >> > >> dictionaries in IPC >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> which is Inconsistent with spec[2] since it assumes all >> > >> >> > > > dictionaries >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> are at the start of stream (see details in PR comments, >> > >> and this >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> fix may not catch up with version 0.15). @Micah >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> Kornfield >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > ii. ARROW-1875: Write 64-bit ints as strings in >> > >> integration >> > >> >> > > > test >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> JSON files[3] >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > Java side code already checked in, other >> > >> implementations >> > >> >> > > seems >> > >> >> > > > not. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > iii. ARROW-6202: OutOfMemory in JdbcAdapter[4] >> > >> Caused by >> > >> >> > > trying >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > to load all records in one contiguous batch, fixed >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> by providing iterator API for iteratively reading in >> > >> >> > > ARROW-6219[5]. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > Thanks, >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > Ji Liu >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > [1] >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F% >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > 2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Farrow%2Fpull%2F4960&data=02%7C01%7CE >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > ric.Erhardt%40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbead81a42104034a4f308d736678a45%7 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637037690648216338&a >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > mp;sdata=eDF%2FAsJmVs7WjfEuNBYo%2F1TypIN44xx1TTlK6kQHZVg%3D& >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > reserved=0 [2] >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F% >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > 2Farrow.apache.org >> > >> >> > > > %2Fdocs%2Fipc.html&data=02%7C01%7CEric.Erh >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > ardt%40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbead81a42104034a4f308d736678a45%7C72f988 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637037690648216338&sdat >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > a=H0pM8bVKsOyeORDhHxLlS%2BpaS%2F5meT52wxTKmNssuMk%3D&reserve >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > d=0 [3] >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F% >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > 2Fissues.apache.org >> > >> >> > > > %2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FARROW-1875&data=02%7C0 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > 1%7CEric.Erhardt%40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbead81a42104034a4f308d736678 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > a45%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637037690648216 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > 338&sdata=coTpuoEGhfjyOSBTagdlohOTX24DQZmtbWC0gYsDmkM%3D& >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > ;reserved=0 [4] >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F% >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > 2Fissues.apache.org >> > >> >> > > > %2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FARROW-6202%5B5&data=02 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > %7C01%7CEric.Erhardt%40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbead81a42104034a4f308d73 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > 6678a45%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63703769064 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > 8216338&sdata=gnyUMk8cUgwc802QBLF3eAp3mznYwonlbF0qmGyzgmY%3D >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > &reserved=0] >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fis >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> sues.apache.org >> > >> >> > > > %2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FARROW-6219&data=02%7C01%7CEric >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> .Erhardt%40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbead81a42104034a4f308d736678a45%7C72f988 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637037690648216338&sdata=d3 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> LF%2BTeWSprASqO%2ByE4LywlsULHGcb1Iq%2F2byHrEPkY%3D&reserved=0 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > -- From:Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> Send >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > Time:2019年8月19日(星期一) 23:03 To:dev < >> > >> dev@arrow.apache.org> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > Subject:Re: Timeline for 0.15.0 release >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > I'm going to work some on organizing the 0.15.0 >> > >> backlog some >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > this week, if anyone wants to help with grooming >> > >> >> > > (particularly >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > for languages other than C++/Python where I'm >> > >> focusing) that >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > would be helpful. There have been almost 500 JIRA >> > >> issues >> > >> >> > > opened >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > since the >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > 0.14.0 release, so we should make sure to check >> > >> whether >> > >> >> > > there's >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > any regressions or other serious bugs that we >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > should >> > >> try to >> > >> >> > > fix >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > for 0.15.0. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 6:23 PM Wes McKinney >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > <wesmck...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > The Windows wheel issue in 0.14.1 seems to be >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > F%2Fissues.apache.org >> > >> >> > > > %2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FARROW-6015&data=02 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > %7C01%7CEric.Erhardt%40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbead81a42104034a4f308d >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > 736678a45%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C6370376 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > 90648216338&sdata=D9lqHR16oRAFlPaIrcXq3UtW%2BLuJQW1u0Gom2u >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > WEWg0%3D&reserved=0 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > I think the root cause could be the Windows >> > >> changes in >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Farrow%2Fcommit%2F&data=02%7C01%7 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > CEric.Erhardt%40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbead81a42104034a4f308d736678a >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > 45%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63703769064821 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > 6338&sdata=iPmFB%2BncIbmvp5D31vjB4A2KyuMP%2B83Vp7%2BDiOxvl >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > bs%3D&reserved=0 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> 223ae744cc2a12c60cecb5db593263a03c13f85a >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > I would be appreciative if a volunteer would look >> > >> into what >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > was >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> wrong >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > with the 0.14.1 wheels on Windows. Otherwise >> > >> 0.15.0 Windows >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > wheels will be broken, too >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > The bad wheels can be found at >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > F%2Fbintray.com%2Fapache%2Farrow%2Fpython%23files%2Fpython%252 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > F0.14.1&data=02%7C01%7CEric.Erhardt% >> > >> 40microsoft.com >> > >> >> > > > %7Ccbea >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > d81a42104034a4f308d736678a45%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db4 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > 7%7C1%7C0%7C637037690648216338&sdata=vZzx4HNS9qp2UWhFagqfJ >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > zbY%2BGzwspH1TO3wdfrbA6Y%3D&reserved=0 >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 1:28 PM Antoine Pitrou < >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 11:17:07 -0700 Micah >> > >> Kornfield >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > <emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > In C++ they are >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > independent, we could have 32-bit array >> > >> lengths and >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> variable-length >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > types with 64-bit offsets if we wanted (we >> > >> just >> > >> >> > > > wouldn't >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > be >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> able to >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > have a List child with more than INT32_MAX >> > >> elements). >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I think the point is we could do this in C++ >> > >> but we >> > >> >> > > > don't. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> I'm not sure we >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > would have introduced the "Large" types if we >> > >> did. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > 64-bit offsets take twice as much space as >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > 32-bit >> > >> >> > > offsets, >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > so if >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> you're >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > storing lots of small-ish lists or strings, >> > >> 32-bit >> > >> >> > > offsets >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > are preferrable. So even with 64-bit array >> > >> lengths from >> > >> >> > > > the >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > start >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> it would >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > still be beneficial to have types with 32-bit >> > >> offsets. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Going with the limited address space in Java >> > >> and >> > >> >> > > calling >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > it a >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> reference >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > implementation seems suboptimal. If a >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > consumer >> > >> uses a >> > >> >> > > > "Large" >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> type >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > presumably it is because they need the >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > ability >> > >> to store >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > more >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> than INT32_MAX >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > child elements in a column, otherwise it is >> > >> just >> > >> >> > > wasting >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > space >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> [1]. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > Probably. Though if the individual elements >> > >> (lists or >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > strings) >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> are >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > large, not much space is wasted in proportion, >> > >> so it may >> > >> >> > > be >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> simpler in >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > such a case to always create a "Large" type >> > >> array. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > [1] I suppose theoretically there might be >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > some >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > performance >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> benefits on >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > 64-bit architectures to using the native word >> > >> sizes. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > Concretely, common 64-bit architectures don't >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > do >> > >> that, as >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > 32-bit >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> is an >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > extremely common integer size even in >> > >> high-performance >> > >> >> > > > code. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > Regards >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > Antoine. >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > >
