Wes,

This makes sense. Thank you.

On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote:

> hi Deepak,
>
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Deepak Majeti <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Wes,
> >
> > I too agree that having a single general purpose I/O implementation makes
> > sense moving forward.
> > We can have a separate build option to build only the parquet-cpp library
> > for those who want to encode/decode just the parquet format.
>
> The changes I'm describing are more invasive because it also coupled
> to parquet-cpp's memory management, namely parquet::Buffer
> (https://github.com/apache/parquet-cpp/blob/master/src/
> parquet/util/buffer.h)
> and parquet::MemoryAllocator
> (https://github.com/apache/parquet-cpp/blob/master/src/
> parquet/util/mem-allocator.h).
>
> One of the benefits of consolidating the memory interfaces is that we
> can provide zero-copy data handoffs from the decoders to Arrow
> consumers (or other applications that handle the buffers).
>
> The goal is that we would make it easy for a parquet-cpp user to
> statically link only the libarrow symbols she/he needs for the
> application and not have to ship Arrow shared libraries separately
> necessarily.
>
> Let me know if this makes sense / what concerns you might have.
>
> Thanks
> Wes
>
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Uwe L. Korn <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello Wes,
> >>
> >> As the classes used from Arrow are very low-level and should not
> >> prohibit the integration of parquet-cpp into other systems, I'm fully in
> >> support of making Arrow a hard dependency. The current two
> >> implementations look very similar of the not-shared-but-shall-be-shared
> >> components. Given that I/O implementations in Arrow would also benefit
> >> (from) other file formats such as Feather and the memory management of
> >> Arrow will see great improvements I don't see a need that parquet-cpp
> >> should have its own abstractions.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Uwe
> >>
> >> --
> >>   Uwe L. Korn
> >>   [email protected]
> >>
> >> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016, at 11:17 PM, Wes McKinney wrote:
> >> > hi folks,
> >> >
> >> > Spurred by the discussion and bugfix for PARQUET-799, I'd like to do
> >> > something about the IO interfaces that we currently have implemented
> >> > in parquet-cpp.
> >> >
> >> > For C++ at least, the Parquet project is not an ideal place to be
> >> > maintaining cross-platform IO and memory management. There are
> >> > portability and concurrent access issues we will eventually need to
> >> > deal with to make parquet-cpp work well in diverse production
> >> > environments.
> >> >
> >> > In parallel, we've been developing a general, low-overhead IO
> >> > subsystem inside Apache Arrow:
> >> >
> >> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/master/cpp/src/arrow/io
> >> >
> >> > Since Arrow is about in-memory columnar data structures and efficient
> >> > IO / RPC / IPC, this is a much more appropriate place to maintain such
> >> > code (in the absence of a sort of "Apache C++ Commons" library).
> >> > There, we currently have more mature implementations of:
> >> >
> >> > - Operating system files (which also work on Windows)
> >> > - Memory mapped files
> >> > - HDFS (either using libhdfs or libhdfs3 at your choosing)
> >> >
> >> > Additionally, the "Buffer" abstraction (which handles memory lifetime
> >> > and provides a general-purpose way to pass around a block of memory
> >> > which may or may not be owned by the application) is implemented in
> >> > both Parquet [1] and Arrow [2].
> >> >
> >> > Since, fundamentally, parquet-cpp is a library for encoding and
> >> > decoding the Parquet file format rather than general purpose IO /
> >> > file-like interfaces, I propose that we excise this code from the
> >> > library and make Arrow a hard dependency in libparquet. I believe our
> >> > respective developer communities would benefit from a hardening of the
> >> > IO and memory interfaces that are being developed in Arrow, and it
> >> > will lead to better quality software and reduced fragmentation.
> >> >
> >> > I wanted to bring this up as we are on the cusp of making the first
> >> > ASF release of parquet-cpp, and while this work might not make the cut
> >> > for 0.1, if we agree it's a good idea it would be good to do it sooner
> >> > rather than later.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks and happy holidays / best wishes for 2017,
> >> > Wes
> >> >
> >> > [1]:
> >> > https://github.com/apache/parquet-cpp/blob/master/src/
> >> parquet/util/buffer.h
> >> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/master/cpp/src/
> arrow/buffer.h
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > regards,
> > Deepak Majeti
>



-- 
regards,
Deepak Majeti

Reply via email to