Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-25 Thread Ben Harkins
For anyone that didn't see the [RESULT] thread [1], this vote has passed. [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/odm5pmxssyd9kw1wvgdkg8hd044czqnk On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 7:01 AM Uwe L. Korn wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2023, at 5:49 AM, Daniel Weeks wrote: > > +1 > > > > On Fri, Oct

Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-10 Thread Uwe L. Korn
+1 (binding) On Sat, Oct 7, 2023, at 5:49 AM, Daniel Weeks wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2023, 8:33 PM Gang Wu wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> Best, >> Gang >> >> On Sat, Oct 7, 2023 at 11:05 AM Micah Kornfield >> wrote: >> >> > I'm +1 (non-binding) for the proposal in general. >> > >> > I

Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-06 Thread Daniel Weeks
+1 On Fri, Oct 6, 2023, 8:33 PM Gang Wu wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Best, > Gang > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2023 at 11:05 AM Micah Kornfield > wrote: > > > I'm +1 (non-binding) for the proposal in general. > > > > I do have a concern that we should be implementing > >

Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-06 Thread Gang Wu
+1 (non-binding) Best, Gang On Sat, Oct 7, 2023 at 11:05 AM Micah Kornfield wrote: > I'm +1 (non-binding) for the proposal in general. > > I do have a concern that we should be implementing > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-2182 (ignoring stats for > logical types the reader

Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-06 Thread Micah Kornfield
I'm +1 (non-binding) for the proposal in general. I do have a concern that we should be implementing https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-2182 (ignoring stats for logical types the reader doesn't understand) and its equivalent in other libraries first, but given potential low usage we

Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-06 Thread Gábor Szádovszky
+1 About the naming. We already use INT_8, INT_16 etc. for logical types for integer values. What do you think about FLOAT_16 to be consistent? Cheers, Gabor On 2023/10/05 22:17:13 Ryan Blue wrote: > +1 > > I'm all for adding a 2-byte floating point representation since even 4-byte > floats

Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-05 Thread Ryan Blue
+1 I'm all for adding a 2-byte floating point representation since even 4-byte floats are quite expensive to store. On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 1:43 PM Xinli shang wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 1:32 PM Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > +1 from me (non-binding). > > > >

Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-05 Thread Xinli shang
+1 On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 1:32 PM Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > Hello, > > +1 from me (non-binding). > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 16:14:00 -0400 > Ben Harkins > wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I would like to propose adding a half-precision floating point type to > > the

Re: [VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-05 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Hello, +1 from me (non-binding). Regards Antoine. On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 16:14:00 -0400 Ben Harkins wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to propose adding a half-precision floating point type to > the Parquet format specification, in accordance with the active > proposal here: > > >-

[VOTE][Format] Add Float16 type to specification

2023-10-04 Thread Ben Harkins
Hi everyone, I would like to propose adding a half-precision floating point type to the Parquet format specification, in accordance with the active proposal here: - https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/184 To summarize, the current proposal would introduce a Float16 logical type,