Andrew, what do you think about tweeting this series out through @ApacheArrow?

-David

On Mon, Oct 17, 2022, at 16:50, Andrew Lamb wrote:
> And the final installment:
> https://arrow.apache.org/blog/2022/10/17/arrow-parquet-encoding-part-3/
>
> On Sat, Oct 8, 2022 at 9:47 AM Andrew Lamb <al...@influxdata.com> wrote:
>
>> Second post is now live  (this time with non localhost url :thumbsup:):
>>
>> https://arrow.apache.org/blog/2022/10/08/arrow-parquet-encoding-part-2/
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 4:57 PM Andrew Lamb <al...@influxdata.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Let's just say the posting process has been a comedy of errors by me
>>> 🤦‍♂️. I apologize for the noise
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 4:17 PM Will Jones <will.jones...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://arrow.apache.org/blog/2022/10/05/arrow-parquet-encoding-part-1/
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 12:48 PM Sasha Krassovsky <
>>>> krassovskysa...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Hi, we aren’t able to connect to your localhost 😀
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Oct 5, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Andrew Lamb <al...@influxdata.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > We have published the first post:
>>>> > > http://localhost:4000/blog/2022/10/05/arrow-parquet-encoding-part-1/
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Sun, Oct 2, 2022 at 7:00 AM Andrew Lamb <al...@influxdata.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> We are working on a series of blog posts[1][2][3] that we plan to
>>>> > publish
>>>> > >> to the arrow blog about how structured data is represented using
>>>> the two
>>>> > >> formats.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Among other things, I hope this may help other Arrow / Parquet
>>>> > >> implementers as well as draw attention to the fact that parquet and
>>>> > arrow
>>>> > >> both support nested structures, albeit differently.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> We would welcome any feedback from the community,
>>>> > >> Andrew
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-site/pull/245
>>>> > >> [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow-site/pull/246
>>>> > >> [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow-site/pull/247
>>>> > >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>

Reply via email to