+1 (non-binding) Best, Prashant Singh
On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 2:55 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <etudenhoef...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 7:31 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > >> +1 (non binding) >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 11:20 PM Ryan Blue <rdb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > I’d like to vote on the spec changes in PR 12841. This is a small >> change that makes handling default values for structs much easier. >> Initially, we allowed both a struct and its fields to have default values, >> but the values could conflict. For instance, ADD COLUMN point struct<x int >> default 0, y int default 0> default struct(-1, -1). >> > >> > The fix is to always track default values at the field level and allow >> only null or null-null for the struct level defaults. That makes the >> feature more predictable because the struct’s default never needs to be >> modified or have field-level changes applied (i.e. removing field y or >> adding field z). >> > >> > In addition, I want to mention that this is not a one-way decision. We >> can always allow the struct-level default to differ later, if we have use >> cases in which a missing struct needs to have a different default than >> missing fields. >> > >> > Please vote in the next 72 hours: >> > >> > [ ] +1 Add these changes to the spec >> > [ ] +0 >> > [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Ryan >> >
