AFAIK encryption is not fully supported in parquet-cpp 1.5.0 so
reading and writing files with encryption is not possible. Am I wrong
about that?

I'm wholly supportive of changing the project to use a released
version of the Parquet format, so let's do that ASAP.
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 1:30 PM Gidon Gershinsky <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yep! (sent in parallel :)
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 8:19 PM Zoltan Ivanfi <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > As a short update, I just checked the PR for PARQUET-1419 and although in
> > its current form it is a breaking change, it can be easily rewritten to
> > become backwards-compatible so this part of the problem does not apply any
> > more.
> >
> > Br,
> >
> > Zoltan
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 7:10 PM Zoltan Ivanfi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On the Parquet sync we discussed that the practice of maintaining a copy
> > > of parquet.thrift in parquet-cpp is dangerous and that we must take care
> > to
> > > not release parquet-format changes in parquet-cpp before we officially
> > > release them in parquet-format. As I got back to my computer and started
> > to
> > > create a JIRA about this, I noticed that unfortunately this has already
> > > happened.
> > >
> > > The encryption-releated parquet.thrift changes have not only been added
> > to
> > > only parquet-format, but to parquet-cpp as well, and these changes got
> > > released in parquet-cpp 1.5.0. This is very unfortunate, because
> > > PARQUET-1419 would change the encryption in a breaking way, which is only
> > > acceptable as long as the original is not released. Additionally, it has
> > > been discussed that a formal voting should take place before
> > incorporating
> > > the encryption features in the format.
> > >
> > > Now that parquet-cpp has already shipped these changes, we must choose
> > the
> > > lesser evil of the following two options:
> > >
> > >    - Release a parquet-cpp 1.6.0 with a breaking change and risk that
> > >    encrypted data files already written with parquet-cpp 1.5.0 will not
> > be
> > >    readable any more.
> > >    - Release the encryption in parquet-format as it is, regardless of
> > >    voting results and discard PARQUET-1419.
> > >
> > > Personally I have a hard time deciding which one I consider lesser evil.
> > > What are your opinions?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Zoltan
> > >
> >

Reply via email to