Thanks guys. We'll create a doc with a description of the current interop
tests, including details on how to build/run them.


On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 7:22 PM Deepak Majeti <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I will make the first attempt to review the C++ code. I reviewed part of it
> a while ago.
> Java-C++ inter-operation testing is my main concern. Can you share some
> details on what has been tested?
> I need to update myself with the key management part and see if we can add
> some test parquet files written in Java along with the keys to the data
> folder.
>
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 10:18 AM Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > hi folks,
> >
> > I'm extraordinarily busy but it seems likely that the code review for
> > Parquet C++ is largely going to fall on my shoulders. Since this is a
> > large patch with many touch-points in the C++ codebase, and there
> > hasn't been much feedback over the course of its development, I would
> > like to leave thoughtful code review so that we can avoid issues that
> > may lead to burdensome maintenance issues.
> >
> > On the OpenSSL issue -- there are many CMake projects in the wild that
> > use OpenSSL and there are many examples of how to incorporate other
> > dependencies into the Arrow build system. I don't have time to work on
> > this right now so someone else will have to sort out the toolchain
> > issue
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 8:48 AM Gidon Gershinsky <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > <re-sending from another account>
> > >
> > > Tham, thank you for this! and for volunteering early for the C++
> version
> > > work, driving it forward and creating the bulk of the parquet-cpp
> > > encryption code along the way.
> > >
> > > @All - this announcement means that two implementations of Parquet
> > > encryption, fully conforming to the formal specification, are available
> > > today. Thanks to Revital for contributing to C++ version compliance
> with
> > > the encryption spec, and for running a set of basic Java-C++ encryption
> > > interoperability tests. We have tested plaintext and encrypted footer
> > > modes, GCM and GCM_CTR algorithms, new and legacy readers. Files
> written
> > > with parquet-cpp are successfully parsed by parquet-mr, and vice versa.
> > >
> > > Let me also thank Junjie, Nandor, Anna and Xinli for their support and
> > vote
> > > for the encryption specification - along with the PMC folks.
> > >
> > > All parquet-format pull requests are merged by now into the encryption
> > > branch,
> > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/tree/encryption
> > >
> > > The community is welcome to review the parquet-mr pull requests, in the
> > > following order:
> > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/pull/613
> > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/pull/614
> > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/pull/643
> > >
> > >
> > > Currently, an end-to-end implementation of Java (mr) Parquet encryption
> > is
> > > collected in this branch:
> > > https://github.com/ggershinsky/parquet-mr/tree/encr
> > > Thanks to Xinli for working with this branch code, and contributing to
> it
> > > based on his field experience. Everybody is welcome to do the same.
> > > @All - it would be helpful to review & merge the above PRs in
> > > apache/parquet-mr/encryption, so that folks can work with it instead of
> > my
> > > private branch..
> > >
> > > And I certainly second Tham's call to review & merge the parquet-cpp
> pull
> > > requests. By now, we have a number of companies starting to utilize
> > Parquet
> > > encryption (both C++ and Java), including IBM.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers, Gidon.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:40 PM Tham Ha <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi community,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > After a long time of development, I'm honor to announce that we have
> > just
> > > > completed C++ parquet encryption module which implements encryption
> in
> > low
> > > > level api and with examples included.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To have this feature completed, I would like to thank Gidon and
> > Revital for
> > > > their contribution.
> > > >
> > > > Gidon had a key role in encryption design and in writing Java version
> > code
> > > > on which we based on to write C++ version. He also wrote crypto
> > package in
> > > > C++ version.
> > > >
> > > > Revital and me has been joining together in writing C++ version.
> > Revital
> > > > was responsible for AAD calculations, API updating (to be the same
> with
> > > > Java version) and Java-C++ inter-operation testing. I was writing the
> > first
> > > > draft (properties, metadata, writer, reader) and keeping them updated
> > when
> > > > crypto package change.
> > > >
> > > > We have had a great time to cooperate. Thank Gidon and Revital for
> all
> > > > guide and experience I have received from them, too.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Here are the links of pull requests:
> > > >
> > > > 1) encryption module (properties, metadata, writer, reader):
> > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/2555.
> > > >
> > > > 2) some merged pull requests for new thrift structure and crypto
> > algorithm,
> > > > and one still open: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/3520
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > However, in order to make (1) buildable with current build scripts,
> we
> > need
> > > > “adding openssl in C++ build toolchain” which is mentioned in this
> > jira:
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-4302. I will be grateful
> > if
> > > > someone could help fullfill this work.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > About current pull requests, they has been currently using in our
> > > > development phase at Emotiv (https://www.emotiv.com/). We love using
> > > > parquet files to store EEG data. We are going to release a product
> with
> > > > encrypted parquet files soon and look forward to the official release
> > of
> > > > parquet encryption feature. So it will be many thank and great honor
> to
> > > > have you review and merge them (if qualified).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you very much!
> > > >
> > > > Tham
> > > >
> >
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Deepak Majeti
>

Reply via email to