Chris,
I'm trying to understand implications of OGRLayer::WriteArrowBatch():
This method and CreateFeature() are mutually exclusive in the same session.
The context is binding code where the user could potentially call
either of these methods at any point during the session.
Does "session" refer to the layer or dataset instance, or the GDAL
session itself?
Dataset and layer instances
In tests with GPKG, using WriteArrowBatch() followed by
CreateFeature() worked and didn't cause any obvious problems.
yes, because for that driver (actually all drivers except
Parquet&Arrow), WriteArrowBatch() results in CreateFeature() behind the
hood. But you'd likely hit issues on Parquet or Arrow datasets, for
which implementation limitations lead to the general restriction. And
as we have nothing in the test suite that checks that mixing
WriteArrowBatch() & CreateFeature() works even for code where it is OK
currently, you could be exposed to potential regressions if the
implementation changed in the future.
Should
binding code guard against this in general?
I'd say up to you. The SWIG bindings don't for example.
Similarly, CreateFieldFromArrowSchema() and CreateField() are mutually
exclusive in the same session. Is there any issue with using
CreateField() and WriteArrowBatch() in the same session?
Same as above w.r.t Arrow/Parquet driver. The feature writing logic
between the Arrow and per-feature strategies takes different code paths.
I don't say reconciling them would be impossible, but clearly an
implementation complication as I didn't see the point in supporting
mixed workflows.
Even
--
http://www.spatialys.com
My software is free, but my time generally not.
_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
