Adding my +1 (binding) vote (technically votes need 3 binding +1's so
this will pass)

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 4:12 PM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> The vote has been open for a while now without objection, so the vote passes 
> with 2 +1 votes (binding), 4 +1 votes (non-binding).
>
> Thanks to all the contributors and reviewers who worked on these changes.
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022, at 13:28, José Almeida wrote:
> > Thanks for the reply David. Your answer is correct.
> >
> > The first PR [1], we are not voting for it yet. It contains what we've
> > built from the JDBC using flight-sql so far. I don't recall if we already
> > implemented the proposals from PR [2] and [3].
> > I guess that we already have a draft of typeInfo and ColumnMetadata on
> > JDBC, but they will need changes after this is approved.
> > Feel free to take a look in the JDBC PR and give us your feedback Andrew.
> > All feedbacks are welcome 😀
> >
> > The second PR [2] contains the metadata related to the columns, so some
> > operations will be able to send it as response and the JDBC/ODBC will have
> > access to it. The metadata that we are sending
> > were the ones we identified, but perhaps there should be more that we
> > couldn't identify.
> >
> > The third PR[3] contains another functionality that retrieves information
> > about the types that the data sources support.
> >
> > Feel free to ask any questions you might have 😀
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 10:13 AM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Maybe one of the contributors wants to chime in with more details, but:
> >>
> >> PR#12254 isn't part of the vote, it's just the motivation for these
> >> changes. I suppose it isn't fully in sync with the other PRs?
> >> PR#11999 annotates fields with metadata that is used to support JDBC/ODBC
> >> drivers (e.g. the ability to tell what table a column originated from)
> >> PR#11982 is used to retrieve metadata about supported SQL data types.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022, at 16:08, Andrew Lamb wrote:
> >> > BTW thank you all for your work in this matter (making JDBC/ODBC
> >> clients)!
> >> > I think it is super valuable for the overall ecosystem.
> >> >
> >> > I am sorry for missing the conversation, but I am not clear on what we
> >> are
> >> > voting on. Can we please clarify what changes are proposed to FlightSQL?
> >> >
> >> > The PRs appear to contain changes to FlightSql.proto that seem somewhat
> >> > redundant / contradictory. For example:
> >> >
> >> > Metadata named `CATALOG_NAME` on  [1]
> >> > Metadata named `ARROW:FLIGHT:SQL:CATALOG_NAME` on [2]
> >> > No metadata for catalog name on [3] (but does have other metadata like
> >> > auto_increment)
> >> >
> >> > Andrew
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/12254
> >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/11999/
> >> > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/11982
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 2:02 PM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Moral +1 from me. I've posted minor comments on the specs changes in the
> >> >> PRs.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Le 16/03/2022 à 20:50, David Li a écrit :
> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Jose Almeida and James Duong have proposed two additions to Arrow
> >> Flight
> >> >> SQL, an experimental protocol for interacting with SQL databases over
> >> Arrow
> >> >> Flight. The purpose of these additions is to provide necessary metadata
> >> for
> >> >> implementing a JDBC driver on top of Flight SQL [1].
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The additions are as follows:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - As part of returned schemas, include metadata about the underlying
> >> SQL
> >> >> data type [2].
> >> >> > - Add a new RPC endpoint, GetXdbcTypeInfo, to get metadata about the
> >> >> supported SQL data types [3].
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Both pull requests implement the additions in C++ and Java and contain
> >> >> integration tests.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Please vote whether to accept these enhancements. The vote will be
> >> open
> >> >> for at least 72 hours.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > [ ] +1 Accept these protocol additions
> >> >> > [ ] +0
> >> >> > [ ] -1 Do not accept these protocol additions because…
> >> >> >
> >> >> > [1]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/12254
> >> >> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/11999
> >> >> > [3]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/11982
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -David
> >> >>
> >>

Reply via email to