Thank you!. Once that gets in I will find time (or really try and find someone else to find time) to fill it out for parquet-rs
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 12:04 AM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just a heads-up that I've created a PR [1] to update the matrix > for parquet-cpp and parquet-java. Let me know if you have any > suggestion. Thanks! > > [1] https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/pull/100 > > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 10:11 PM Andrew Lamb <andrewlam...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I wanted to highlight that there is a PR[1] to fill out this matrix for > > cuda . Super exciting to see this starting > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/pull/99# > > > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 2:57 PM Andrew Lamb <andrewlam...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Thank you! A small step perhaps but a major step forward > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 1:03 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I just merged it. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Micah > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 2:32 AM Andrew Lamb <andrewlam...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > The initial feature matrix PR[1], has all outstanding comments > > addressed > > >> > and is ready to merge from my opinion. > > >> > > > >> > Could one of the committers consider merging it so we can start > > filling > > >> the > > >> > matrix out? > > >> > > > >> > Thanks, > > >> > Andrew > > >> > > > >> > [1]: https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/pull/34 > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:22 AM Andrew Lamb < > andrewlam...@gmail.com> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > I filed a ticket [1] to discuss integration testing / feature > > >> > > compatibility testing > > >> > > > > >> > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/issues/441 > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 10:03 AM Andrew Lamb < > > andrewlam...@gmail.com> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > >> I will file a ticket for discussion shortly > > >> > >> > > >> > >> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 06:55 Julien Le Dem <jul...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > >> > >> > > >> > >>> I agree with Antoine for the separate thread/ticket for > > integration > > >> > >>> testing > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> For the « implementation status » PR, I agree we can merge and > > >> > iterate. I > > >> > >>> added a couple of comments that can easily be addressed > > afterwards. > > >> > >>> Julien > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 10:43 Antoine Pitrou < > anto...@python.org> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > IMHO, we should either start a dedicated discussion thread for > > >> > >>> > integration testing, or open a GH issue and discuss it there. > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > Regards > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > Antoine. > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 09:21:33 +0200 > > >> > >>> > Alkis Evlogimenos > > >> > >>> > <alkis.evlogime...@databricks.com.INVALID> > > >> > >>> > wrote: > > >> > >>> > > It would be nice if the integration suite specifies how a > > driver > > >> > can > > >> > >>> be > > >> > >>> > > executed. Then each implementation can provide a driver and > > the > > >> > suite > > >> > >>> > will > > >> > >>> > > use that for validation. > > >> > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > By specifying both reads and writes for the driver we get a > > lot > > >> > more > > >> > >>> > power. > > >> > >>> > > Given an input we can roundtrip all combination of > > >> readers/writers > > >> > >>> and > > >> > >>> > > verify they can roundtrip. > > >> > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 6:42 PM Andrew Lamb < > > >> > >>> > andrewlamb11-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > FWIW I started hacking up a prototype[1] of what a > > >> > parquet-testing > > >> > >>> > > > integration suite might look like if anyone is interested > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/5956 > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 10:39 AM Alkis Evlogimenos > > >> > >>> > > > <alkis.evlogime...@databricks.com.invalid> wrote: > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > +1. > > >> > >>> > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > I would suggest you address the comments first? I went > > >> through > > >> > >>> the > > >> > >>> > open > > >> > >>> > > > > ones and most of them make sense to me (and left few > > >> additional > > >> > >>> > > > comments). > > >> > >>> > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 12:42 PM Andrew Lamb < > > >> > >>> andrewlam...@gmail.com > > >> > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > wrote: > > >> > >>> > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > Thank you > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 11:40 PM Micah Kornfield < > > >> > >>> > > > emkornfi...@gmail.com> > > >> > >>> > > > > > wrote: > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > Hi Andrew, > > >> > >>> > > > > > > I agree with this sentiment, I asked on the PR if > > there > > >> > would > > >> > >>> > be > > >> > >>> > > > > another > > >> > >>> > > > > > > pass and then I can merge it. > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > Cheers, > > >> > >>> > > > > > > Micah > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 3:20 AM Andrew Lamb < > > >> > >>> > andrewlam...@gmail.com> > > >> > >>> > > > > > > wrote: > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > Hello Parquet Devs, > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > I propose we merge the first (admittedly bare > bones) > > >> > >>> > > > "Implementation > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > Status" page PR [1] to the website soon. I think > > this > > >> > page > > >> > >>> is > > >> > >>> > vital > > >> > >>> > > > > to > > >> > >>> > > > > > > the > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > Parquet community (and to any attempt to extend > the > > >> > >>> format) so > > >> > >>> > the > > >> > >>> > > > > > sooner > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > the better. > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > The reason to merge the PR now is to have a base > > from > > >> > which > > >> > >>> > to > > >> > >>> > > > build. > > >> > >>> > > > > > > That > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > PR is already over a year old and has so many > > >> comments it > > >> > >>> is > > >> > >>> > hard > > >> > >>> > > > to > > >> > >>> > > > > > > follow > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > or know what the path forward is. If we insist on > > >> sorting > > >> > >>> all > > >> > >>> > the > > >> > >>> > > > > > details > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > out before we merge it I fear it will never merge. > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > Once we have a page, I think the next steps are to > > >> add a > > >> > >>> > preamble > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > explaining what it is for and to start trying to > > fill > > >> out > > >> > >>> the > > >> > >>> > chart > > >> > >>> > > > > for > > >> > >>> > > > > > > an > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > implementation (I am happy to try for > parquet-rs). I > > >> > >>> suspect > > >> > >>> > during > > >> > >>> > > > > > that > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > process we will have to adjust some of the charts > > >> more. > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > Thank you for your consideration (and thank you > for > > >> all > > >> > the > > >> > >>> > > > comments > > >> > >>> > > > > so > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > far) > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > Andrew > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > [1]: > https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/pull/34 > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
