Hi All, I checked the list and the last ([4] https://lancedb.github.io/lance/format.html) seems interesting to me and would be interested to work on it.
Regards, Zoltan Ratkai On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 5:55 AM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the suggestion! > > I think the discussion here would be too vague. Let me try to create > separate > issues under orc-format once I have broken down the list. > > Best, > Gang > > > > > On Sat, Dec 9, 2023 at 6:34 AM Dongjoon Hyun <dongj...@apache.org> wrote: > > > BTW, feel free to create milestones at `orc-format` repository, Gang. > > > > In addition, we can expand our discussion to other `orc-format` versions > > (1.0.x, 1.1.x, ...) instead of focusing on `2.0.0`. > > > > We can categorize the items into proper milestones. > > > > Dongjoon. > > > > On 2023/12/07 18:34:46 Dongjoon Hyun wrote: > > > Ya, it sounds like a good plan to materialize them. > > > Thank you for driving this, Gang. > > > > > > Dongjoon. > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:52 PM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > No, I don't have any timeline yet. My intention is to find if anyone > > > > is interested in working on any part or proposing any new feature. > > > > The items I listed above can be the starting point to discuss. It > would > > > > be good to collect enough information here on the ML and then make > > > > a list on a Github issue to sort things out. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Gang > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 1:45 PM Dongjoon Hyun < > dongjoon.h...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the heads up. As a part of discussion, do you have > any > > > > > timeline or target ORC version for orc-format v2.0? > > > > > Given that it's one of the non-trivial efforts, I'm wondering what > > we can > > > > > achieve in 2024. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Dongjoon. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:00 PM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The Apache ORC community has created a separate orc-format > > > > > > repo [1] to hold format specs. It can help us decouple the > versions > > > > > > of format and implementation. > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, it is now a good time to discuss the next step to evolve the > > > > > > ORC format. To give my two cents, following items are what we can > > do: > > > > > > - Follow up with the ORC Format v2 proposal [2] > > > > > > - Parquet feature parity [3] > > > > > > - Lance feature parity [4] > > > > > > > > > > > > Considering the activity in the community, I'd like to hear > > different > > > > > > opinions before taking any action. Any suggestions are welcome. > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/orc-format > > > > > > [2] https://orc.apache.org/specification/ORCv2 > > > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format > > > > > > [4] https://lancedb.github.io/lance/format.html > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Gang > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
