Thanks Prateek,

Do you think it would be good to start moving the spec development into
markdown format, in preparation for finalizing it?

Andrew

On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 7:28 PM PRATEEK GAUR <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi team,
>
> 1) Andrew
>
>    - Thanks for working on test files. My PR did add all the test files I
>    used to benchmark on datasets. Maybe we can club it together. WIll also
> aid
>    cross language testing
>    -  Kosta Tarasov working on Rust implementation. This is great. Thanks
>
>
> 2) Antoine
>
>    - Thanks a lot for reporting the numbers on AMD. Looks like you are
>    getting 8X the decoding performance of BSS. This is amazing!!.
>    - Thanks for acknowledging the sampling design.
>    - I agree with you on Fastlanes. In some crude experiments I didn't get
>    a good perf benefit from it on Graviton3 (but maybe there was something
>    wrong with my implementation).
>    - Locking the 16bit exception encoding for the spec in this case.
>    - Awesome I think we have solved for all open questions minus the
>    version byte :). (will get back on this soon)
>
>
> 3) Micah
>
>    - FastLanes : The current spec does allow for using FastLane with the
>    configurable enum value for layout. We should be able to inject any
> layout
>    in the current design.
>
>
> Working on resolving all remaining open comments on the spec this week.
>
> Best
> Prateek
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 3:37 AM Steve Loughran <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 at 18:12, Micah Kornfield <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > It looks like the actual issue described for ORC in the paper is that
> it
> > > has multiple sub-encodings in a batch.  This is different then the
> design
> > > proposed here where there is still fixed encoding per page in parquet.
> > > Given reasonably sized pages I don't think branch misprediction should
> > be a
> > > big issue for new encodings.  I agree that we should be conservative in
> > > general for adding new encodings.
> > >
> > >
> > +1
> >
>

Reply via email to