Ah okay, yeah that's a reasonable angle too haha
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 1:59 PM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote: > Frankly it was from a "not drastically refactoring things" perspective :) > > At least for Arrow: list[utf8] is effectively a utf8 array with an extra > array of offsets, so there's relatively little overhead. (In particular, > there's not an extra allocation per array; there's just an overall > allocation of a bitmap/offsets buffer.) > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022, at 13:46, Gavin Ray wrote: > > I suppose you're thinking from a memory/performance perspective right? > > Allocating a dot character is a lot better than allocating multiple > arrays > > > > Yeah I don't see why not -- this could even be a library internal where > the > > fact that it's dotted is an implementation detail > > Then in the Java implementation or whatnot, you can call > > ".getFullyQualifiedTableName()" which will do the allocating parse to a > > List<String> for you, or whatnot > > > > The array was mostly for convenience's sake (our API is JSON and not > > particularly performance-oriented) > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 1:40 PM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Ah, interesting… > >> > >> A self-recursive schema wouldn't work in Arrow's schema system, so it'd > >> have to be the latter solution. Or, would it work to have a dotted name > in > >> the schema name column? Would parsing that back out (for applications > that > >> want to work with the full hierarchy) be too much trouble? > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022, at 13:14, Gavin Ray wrote: > >> > Antoine, I can't comment on the Go code (not qualified) but to me, the > >> > "verification" test > >> > examples look like a mixture between JDBC and Java FlightSQL driver > >> usage, > >> > and seem solid. > >> > > >> > There was one reservation I had about the ability to handle datasource > >> > namespacing that I brought up early on in the proposal discussions > >> > (David responded to it but I got busy and forgot to reply again) > >> > > >> > If you have a datasource which provides possibly arbitrary levels of > >> schema > >> > namespace (something like Apache Calcite, for example) > >> > How do you represent the table/schema names? > >> > > >> > Suppose I have a service with a DB layout like this: > >> > > >> > / foo > >> > / bar > >> > / baz > >> > /qux > >> > / table1 > >> > - column1 > >> > > >> > At my dayjob, we have a technology which is very similar to > >> > ADBC/FlightSQL > >> > (would be great to adopt Substrait + ADBC once they're mature enough) > >> > - > >> > > >> > https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine/blob/master/dc-agents/README.md#data-connectors > >> > - > >> > > >> > https://techcrunch.com/2022/06/28/hasura-now-lets-developers-turn-any-data-source-into-a-graphql-api/ > >> > > >> > We wound up having to redesign the specification to handle datasources > >> that > >> > don't fit the "database-schema-table" or "database-table" mould > >> > > >> > In the ADBC schema for schema metadata, it looks like it expects a > >> > single > >> > "schema" struct: > >> > > >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/blob/7866a566f5b7b635267bfb7a87ea49b01dfe89fa/java/core/src/main/java/org/apache/arrow/adbc/core/StandardSchemas.java#L132-L152 > >> > > >> > If you want to be flexible, IMO it would be good to either: > >> > > >> > 1. Have DB_SCHEMA_SCHEMA be self-recursive, so that schemas (with or > >> > without tables) can be nested arbitrarily deep underneath each other > >> > - Fully-Qualified-Table-Name (FQTN) can then be computed by > walking > >> > up from a table and concating the schema name until the root schema is > >> > reached > >> > > >> > 2. Make "catalog" and "schema" go away entirely, and tables just have > a > >> > FQTN that is an array, a database is a collection of tables > >> > - You can compute what would have been the catalog + schema > >> hierarchy > >> > by doing a .reduce() over the list of tables and > >> > > >> > Or maybe there is another, better way. But that's my $0.02 and the > only > >> > real concern about the API I have, without actually trying to build > >> > something with it. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 5:40 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Hello, > >> >> > >> >> I would urge people to review the proposed ADBC APIs, especially the > Go > >> >> and Java APIs which probably benefitted from less feedback than the C > >> one. > >> >> > >> >> Regards > >> >> > >> >> Antoine. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Le 21/09/2022 à 17:40, David Li a écrit : > >> >> > Hello, > >> >> > > >> >> > We have been discussing [1] standard interfaces for Arrow-based > >> database > >> >> access and have been working on implementations of the proposed > >> interfaces > >> >> [2], all under the name "ADBC". This proposal aims to provide a > unified > >> >> client abstraction across Arrow-native database protocols (like > Flight > >> SQL) > >> >> and non-Arrow database protocols, which can then be used by Arrow > >> projects > >> >> like Dataset/Acero and ecosystem projects like Ibis. > >> >> > > >> >> > For details, see the RFC here: > >> >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/14079 > >> >> > > >> >> > I would like to propose that the Arrow project adopt this RFC, > along > >> >> with apache/arrow-adbc commit 7866a56 [3], as version 1.0.0 of the > ADBC > >> API > >> >> standard. > >> >> > > >> >> > Please vote to adopt the specification as described above. (This is > >> not > >> >> a vote to release any components.) > >> >> > > >> >> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > >> >> > > >> >> > [ ] +1 Adopt the ADBC specification > >> >> > [ ] 0 > >> >> > [ ] -1 Do not adopt the specification because... > >> >> > > >> >> > Thanks to the DuckDB and R DBI projects for providing feedback on > and > >> >> implementations of the proposal. > >> >> > > >> >> > [1]: > https://lists.apache.org/thread/cq7t9s5p7dw4vschylhwsfgqwkr5fmf2 > >> >> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc > >> >> > [3]: > >> >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/commit/7866a566f5b7b635267bfb7a87ea49b01dfe89fa > >> >> > > >> >> > Thank you, > >> >> > David > >> >> > >> >
