I may be misunderstanding the MonthDayNano type, but I think it gives a range of roughly +/- INT32_MAX days (5.8 million years?) at nanosecond precision without considering the months component?
On Sat, Jun 21, 2025 at 12:58 PM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote: > Hello Arrow devs, > > There's an ongoing discussion in Iceberg [1] and Parquet [2] to define and > standardize new interval types. Of course, it would be ideal if these new > types had a canonical representation in Arrow. While YEAR_MONTH is the same > as Arrow's month interval, however, DAY_TIME is actually a 128-bit > nanosecond duration and hence I don't think it can be represented by > MonthDayNano or the duration type. > > It might be interesting to consider whether there's some other way to > encode this type in Arrow (or if an extension type should be considered), > or find a way to define it that would more easily map onto an existing type > (while still meeting the Iceberg goal of being ANSI SQL compatible, which > apparently requires +/- 10000 years of range). > > [1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread/65sxmjcfpvbp262dh73v5m4zjdgzt7j1 > [2]: https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/496 > > -David
