[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6300?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16922465#comment-16922465
]
Antoine Pitrou commented on ARROW-6300:
---------------------------------------
Hmm, so if we call Abort() from the destructor, this will be a behaviour
change, as we currently call Close() (flushing any pending data). Perhaps some
code paths in third-party code rely on that.
Also, this means that on the Python side, files created using e.g.
{{pa.output_stream()}} wouldn't flush properly when destroyed. This would break
expectations of Python users.
So perhaps we should keep calling Close() from the destructor. What do you
think?
> [C++] Add io::OutputStream::Abort()
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: ARROW-6300
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-6300
> Project: Apache Arrow
> Issue Type: Wish
> Components: C++
> Reporter: Antoine Pitrou
> Priority: Major
>
> This method would abort the current output stream without trying to flush or
> commit any pending internal data. This makes sense mostly for buffered
> streams. For other streams it could simply synonymous to Close().
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.2#803003)
