> Shouldn't the extension name be `parquet.file`? It's really a direct > mapping of the Parquet FILE type, not something we decided to > standardize independently.
parquet.file sounds good in that it makes it clear where the specification comes from. > Also I wonder if it's the Arrow community's role to standardize such > extension types, or if we should let the Parquet community do it? We have non-arrow namespaced types in geoarrow [1], but they are specified in geoarrow repo. Are you proposing that? Parquet already specified the file type, we'd just be adding a mirror type in Arrow to make handling it practical. [1] https://github.com/geoarrow/geoarrow/blob/main/extension-types.md Rok On Wed, Sep 2, 2026 at 11:05 PM Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]> wrote: > > Shouldn't the extension name be `parquet.file`? It's really a direct > mapping of the Parquet FILE type, not something we decided to > standardize independently. > > Also I wonder if it's the Arrow community's role to standardize such > extension types, or if we should let the Parquet community do it? > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > > Le 02/09/2026 à 22:51, Mandukhai Alimaa a écrit : > > Hi everyone, > > > > Following the recent addition and subsequent refinement of the FILE > > LogicalType to the Parquet format specification [1, 2] and the > > corresponding Parquet C++ > > reader/writer support currently underway [3], we (@rok and I) would > > like to propose defining a matching Canonical Extension Type for the > > Apache Arrow specification: arrow.file. > > > > Motivation > > As storage formats standardize file-level references, Arrow needs a > > canonical in-memory representation to preserve these semantics across > > IPC streams, the C Data Interface, Arrow Flight, and language > > bindings. Without a canonical extension type, file fields lose their > > semantic metadata during serialization. > > > > Proposed High-Level Design: > > The intended design is to directly align with the finalized Parquet spec > [4]. > > > > * Extension name: ``arrow.file``. > > * Storage Type: StructType containing standard optional fields: > > * ``uri`` (Utf8) > > * ``offset`` (Int64) > > * `` size`` (Int64) > > * ``content_type`` (Utf8) > > * `` checksum`` (Utf8) > > * ``inline`` (Binary) > > > > I have created a GitHub issue to track this [5]. Please share your > > thoughts! Thanks! > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/585 > > [2] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/603 > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/50891 > > [4] > https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/LogicalTypes.md#file > > [5] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/51143 > >
