Hello,
It seems ArrayBuilder::Advance has never been terribly useful, since the
user has no obvious way of getting data pointers to the various
underlying buffers. Furthermore, it's almost untested and potentially
buggy (see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-14065).
I therefore
Join link:
https://mkutano.nairuby.org/#/soft-amaranth-alpaca
Sorry it is late. Meeting should be short, as it seems there is a
preference for one meeting.
On 9/29/21 10:59 AM, Benson Muite wrote:
Hi,
Will send a link to a BigBlueButton/OpenVidu instance at 3:45 UTC tomorrow.
Update the
+1 for issues because I believe it would lower the barrier for entry.
I'm +0 on discussions, they can work but would require more active
curation / labeling as they cannot be closed so an "answered /
unanswered" label would probably be needed.
> I think I already get e-mails from issues but
>
Attendees:
Ruihang
Benson
Discussion items:
Self-introduction
OpenVidu seemed to work
Data Fusion introduction
Speed of Arrow development process and intended use cases
Maybe get time zones of attendees?
On 9/30/21 6:58 AM, Benson Muite wrote:
Join link:
+ Ray, Kyle
Thirumalesh Reddy
Dremio | VP of Engineering
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 9:34 AM Daniël Heres wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thank you for the full context and the pointers. Glad that this is
> progressing, I missed the message on the mailing list before. I will have a
> look at the PR!
>
>
Hey Daniël,
If there's something in particular that you'd like to know about I'm happy
to chat further, the Java side of things is mostly there and the C++ side
is being worked on as David mentioned. We're also working on a JDBC driver
that is based upon the Java Flight SQL client in parallel.
We discussed briefly on the sync this morning, but I was wondering what
people thought about removing the user@ mailing list in favor of either
Github issues or discussions. We can try to mirror issues to an
appropriate mailing list if archiving for posterity.
Off the top of my head here are
Le 29/09/2021 à 20:16, Micah Kornfield a écrit :
We discussed briefly on the sync this morning, but I was wondering what
people thought about removing the user@ mailing list in favor of either
Github issues or discussions. We can try to mirror issues to an
appropriate mailing list if
Just to comment on that - we are still using users@ mailing list (though it
has very low traffic/value) at Apache Airflow - but GitHub
Issues/Discussions are indeed rather useful I think and we are rather happy
with those.
I just created
Dear Rust Developers,
As a heads up, several pre-existing security tickets filed against arrow-rs
have been added[1][2] to the RUSTSEC database[1][2] a few hours ago. The
author says he plans to file additional RUSTSEC entries for the other
security tickets [3].
The criteria used for adding the
Hi David,
Thank you for the full context and the pointers. Glad that this is
progressing, I missed the message on the mailing list before. I will have a
look at the PR!
Best regards,
Daniël
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021, 14:12 David Li wrote:
> It's still in progress, the folks from Dremio are
Le 29/09/2021 à 20:51, Micah Kornfield a écrit :
Cons:
- Github is a not a mailing-list and does not integrate well in a normal
e-mail workflow.
Would a mailing list mirror of the issues work for you (I guess it would
require an extra click). I think I already get e-mails from issues but
I'm not for or against this proposal.
I took a few minutes to browse the archives [1]. It seems to me that
the user@ list is working extremely well. People get answers quickly,
problems are converted into JIRA cases, and the discussion often
references existing information sources.
I want to
I am +1 on steering users towards GitHub issues for support questions. I
think there's a lot of value in someone being able to use a search engine
to potentially find an answer to their problem.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:16 PM Micah Kornfield
wrote:
> We discussed briefly on the sync this
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 3:08 PM Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> Le 29/09/2021 à 20:51, Micah Kornfield a écrit :
> >>
> >> Cons:
> >> - Github is a not a mailing-list and does not integrate well in a normal
> >> e-mail workflow.
> >
> >
> > Would a mailing list mirror of the issues work for you (I
I personally think this would be a nice switch.
The ease of searching alone is a worthwhile reason for this switch, which
would
also make the overall barrier to adoption a little bit lower.
I didn't think about decentralizing user issues before, so I think it's a
good thing
to mention. To some
Attendees:
Phillip Cloud
Alenka Frim
Jörn Horstman
Jonathan Keane
Micah Kornfield
Rok Mihevc
Benson Muite
Jacques Nadeau
Eduardo Manuel Ponce Mojica
Weston Pace
Neal Richardson
Joris Van den Bossche
Discussion:
* C++ query engine update (see previous mailing list message)
* 6.0 release is
I would prefer alternating meeting time to optimize for more
attendance and reduce meeting fatigue for those who can attend both.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 1:00 AM Benson Muite wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Will send a link to a BigBlueButton/OpenVidu instance at 3:45 UTC tomorrow.
>
> Update the google doc
I still plan on holding a sync up at 16:00 UTC for anyone who would like to
attend
Zoom Link: https://influxdata.zoom.us/j/94666921249
Pre-meeting Agenda:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1atCVnoff5SR4eM4Lwf2M1BBJTY6g3_HUNR6qswYJW_U/edit
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 3:11 PM QP Hou wrote:
> I
+1 from me too. More and more developers seem to be accustomed to using
GitHub Issues to ask for help, and redirecting them to a mailing list adds
a barrier to participation.
Neal
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:32 PM Phillip Cloud wrote:
> I am +1 on steering users towards GitHub issues for support
>
> Cons:
> - Github is a not a mailing-list and does not integrate well in a normal
> e-mail workflow.
Would a mailing list mirror of the issues work for you (I guess it would
require an extra click). I think I already get e-mails from issues but
have them filtered out with the rest of other
I am also +1 for all of the same reasons both Neal and Philip mention.
Lowering that barrier to participation for getting help + having that
information more easily findable will make it easiest for folks to use
and adopt Arrow. I will add personally I didn't realize I already do
this when working
I started a document where we can crowdsource the October board report
— please leave comments/suggestions. It's due on Oct 13
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bFXqk4PnysChWjQ0XyS9Hz0EimU2_iC3XOMVP0ohpP4/edit?usp=sharing
+1
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 9:53 AM David Li wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> -David
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021, at 08:52, Krisztián Szűcs wrote:
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 10:56 PM Jonathan Keane wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > -Jon
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 2:26 PM
Sounds fine to me.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 6:57 AM Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> It seems ArrayBuilder::Advance has never been terribly useful, since the
> user has no obvious way of getting data pointers to the various
> underlying buffers. Furthermore, it's almost untested and
Hi all,
I wanted to give an update on work that several of us have been doing in
recent months on query processing in C++. Back in March, we circulated [1]
a document [2] with a proposal on implementing the basic pieces of a query
execution engine. Recent patches have introduced some key aspects
26 matches
Mail list logo
