Hi, Could you add integration tests for this as David said at https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/37679#issuecomment-1720143047 ?
See also: https://arrow.apache.org/docs/dev/format/Changing.html Thanks, -- kou In <CAH4123ZTDW7MtHeCdagy3k3=x+ecghuyo3lpirar0riuri9...@mail.gmail.com> "Re: [VOTE] [Format] Add app_metadata to FlightInfo and FlightEndpoint" on Thu, 14 Sep 2023 15:55:14 -0400, Matt Topol <zotthewiz...@gmail.com> wrote: > The PR has been updated for a bit with both C++ and Go implementations, > hopefully I can get some more votes on this thread? > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 12:16 PM Matt Topol <zotthewiz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The C++ code gets auto-generated during build right? Ah, fair point the >> C++ still uses it's own objects. I'll update the PR with a C++ >> implementation. >> >> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 12:03 PM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Don't we need another implementation (if we count the Go codegen as one >>> implementation)? >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023, at 11:48, Matt Topol wrote: >>> > Hey all, >>> > >>> > I would like to propose adding a new app_metadata field to both the >>> > FlightInfo and FlightEndpoint message types of the Arrow Flight >>> protocol. >>> > There has been discussion of doing so for a while and has now been >>> brought >>> > back up in regards to [1]. More specifically, this enables adding >>> > application defined metadata for FlightSQL (by way of FlightInfo) which >>> can >>> > then be utilized to pass information such as QueryID, QueryCost, etc. >>> > >>> > I've put up a PR to add this at [2]. >>> > >>> > The vote will be open for at least 24 hours: >>> > >>> > [ ] +1 Add these fields to the Arrow Flight RPC protocol >>> > [ ] +0 >>> > [ ] -1 Do not add these fields to the Arrow Flight RPC protocol >>> because.... >>> > >>> > Thanks much! >>> > --Matt >>> > >>> > [1]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/37635 >>> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/37679 >>> >>
