On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 5:31 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote:
>
>
> Le 25/06/2020 à 12:18, Antoine Pitrou a écrit :
> >
> > Le 25/06/2020 à 00:40, Wes McKinney a écrit :
> >> hi folks,
> >>
> >> This has come up in some other contexts, but I believe it would be a
> >> good idea to increment the version number in Schema.fbs starting with
> >> 1.0.0 to separate the pre-1.0 and post-1.0 worlds
> >>
> >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/master/format/Schema.fbs#L22
> >>
> >> Given that we are contemplating a number of changes to assist with
> >> forward compatibility and a breaking serialization change for unions,
> >> this would seem prudent so that we do not risk breaking compatibility
> >> with 0.17.1 and prior.
> >>
> >> Given that there are no major backwards incompatibilities, there
> >> should be no problem with 1.0.0 readers reading data generated by
> >> libraries <= 0.17.1.
> >
> > Actually, it seems that a dense array with top-level null values
> > (represented in 0.17.1 fashion) would need non-trivial rewriting of its
> > offsets and child arrays (at least one child array) to represent the
> > nulls at the child level.
> >
> > This is unless we keep the top-level union null bitmap in C++ and only
> > avoid emitting it on the IPC side.  Which would be a slightly weird
> > arrangement, but would limit incompatibilites on the C++ API side.
>
> Actually, if we do this, the same problem will appear on the IPC write
> side (C++-created dense union arrays with a top-level null bitmap will
> need regenerating some of the child buffers).

I see. Well I think we can shut down this issue by giving up on Union
forward compatibility V4 / pre-1.0 libraries.

> Regards
>
> Antoine.

Reply via email to