Hi folks,

Here is the Meeting Notes and Recording link from the Variant Sync on May
7, 2026: [Notes
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IuhLRxw1rcPD_f4jgHuGe3SwFgy7Y5wgEGvLzf6311s/edit?tab=t.g06kaw1fbwhz>
].
There are some action items and active work.
Please reach out if you have any questions.
Thanks.

On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 1:36 PM Neelesh Salian <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I've set up a time starting next week on Thursday (May 7, 2026) at 10 am
> Pacific time for a sync for the active work on Variant.
> This will be a monthly sync (on the first Thursday of every month).
> You can find it on the dev calendar.
> Here is the calendar invite: https://calendar.app.google/b8ykdTV3EaNnVnkv8
> I'll be recording the call and capturing notes in the sync document: Iceberg
> - Variant Community Update
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IuhLRxw1rcPD_f4jgHuGe3SwFgy7Y5wgEGvLzf6311s/edit?usp=sharing>
>  (Meeting
> Notes tab).
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 1:49 PM Steve Loughran <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> + regarding the rust, go and cpp impls, a status from each team would be
>> great!
>>
>> I've been reviewing arrow parquet variant stuff and it is all there,
>> including with some benchmarks and optimisations. Which may put it ahead of
>> the others.
>>
>> It also has some special handling for sorted variants, as key search
>> there is straightforward. AFAIK I don't think the others do that, and nor
>> do I see them going to any effort to sort fields in an object. I think
>> sorting would be good, but you would have to handle the case where there
>> are duplicate keys. It's allowed in the spec, and seems like itcould creep
>> in from nested variants. Has anyone looked at this?
>>
>> Also: has anyone created malformed parquet files with a shredded variant
>> and a metadata entry of the same name. The requirement is "ignore the
>> metadata one", but that's something to test. You'd have to write a shredded
>> file and then edit the binary content to achieve this, or manually create
>> one and put it into the parquet-testing repository under bad-data/
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2026 at 19:08, Qiegang Long <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the doc to track the status! +1 on the dedicated
>>> sync—definitely feels like there’s a lot of work before we see Variant’s
>>> full potential.
>>>
>>> Qiegang
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 11:09 AM Steve Loughran <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is great, we need that tracker as it is cross-project. piece of
>>>> work to say "this is readly
>>>>
>>>> I did have an agenda item from last month's community call which didn't
>>>> get through. If we can retain that open time slot we could do a very quick
>>>> summary of where we are (summarly slides of Qiegang's results and mine, key
>>>> outstanding issues and next steps, then we can start that monthly session
>>>> on it.
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, I have both parquet and iceberg PRs for benchmarks which I
>>>> think are ready for review -please take a look
>>>>
>>>> Finally, I'm thinking about interop of those many, many variant readers
>>>> out there. Has anyone explicitly cross-tested their implementations of
>>>> variant? what about consistent handling of invalid data? That includes
>>>> iceberg-rust, parquet-cpp and more...
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 19 Apr 2026 at 21:57, Neelesh Salian <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> The Variant umbrella issue (#10392
>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/10392>) hasn't been updated
>>>>> in a while, and with active work happening across multiple PRs in Iceberg,
>>>>> Spark, and Parquet, it's been hard to keep track of where things stand.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since a few of us are actively working on variant features, I thought
>>>>> it would help to put together a tracking document so the community has a
>>>>> single place to see the current state, open work, and benchmark findings. 
>>>>> I
>>>>> plan to update this on a weekly basis to keep track of the issues and PRs
>>>>> that are updated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Iceberg Variant Community Document
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IuhLRxw1rcPD_f4jgHuGe3SwFgy7Y5wgEGvLzf6311s/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>>>
>>>>> The document has three tabs:
>>>>>
>>>>>    1. Overview - what shipped in 1.10, what's merged to main, open
>>>>>    work areas, and the dependency graph across Iceberg, Spark, and Parquet
>>>>>    2. Tracker - all open variant issues and PRs across Iceberg,
>>>>>    Parquet-Java, Parquet-Format, and Spark with authors and status
>>>>>    3. Benchmarks - summary of three independent benchmark efforts
>>>>>    (details below)
>>>>>
>>>>> *Benchmark findings*
>>>>>
>>>>> Three independent benchmarks have measured variant performance. All
>>>>> converge on the same picture: variant is a modest improvement over JSON
>>>>> strings today (1.1-1.7x faster reads), but 15-17x slower than typed 
>>>>> columns.
>>>>>
>>>>>    1. Qiegang Long - 14 queries on GitHub Archive, 5 configs:
>>>>>    https://qlong.github.io/posts/2026-03-30-variant-early-results
>>>>>    2. Steve Loughran - JMH microbenchmarks, profiler-driven
>>>>>    optimization:
>>>>>    
>>>>> https://steveloughran.github.io/benchmarking-variants/benchmarking-variants.html
>>>>>    
>>>>> <https://steveloughran.github.io/benchmarking-variants/benchmarking-variants.html>
>>>>>    3. Neelesh Salian - Controlled baseline, 10M+100M rows, write +
>>>>>    read:
>>>>>    
>>>>> https://github.com/nssalian/iceberg/tree/iceberg-variant-benchmark/benchmark
>>>>>
>>>>> If you're working on variant-related changes, please chime in or let
>>>>> me know and I'll add it to the tracker. Feedback on the benchmarks or
>>>>> anything else is welcome.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been giving variant updates during the Iceberg Spark Sync
>>>>> (Tuesdays, 10 AM PT), but given that this work now spans Iceberg, Spark,
>>>>> Parquet, and Flink, I think it deserves its own forum. I'd like to propose
>>>>> a monthly Variant Sync; a short call where contributors can share 
>>>>> progress,
>>>>> surface blockers, and coordinate across repos. If there's interest, I'll
>>>>> set one up and share an invite on this thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Neelesh Salian.
>>>>>
>>>>

Reply via email to