GH-46908: [Docs][Format] Add variant extension type docs - #47456
Conversation
|
|
|
I'll wait for a few reviews on this before I send something on the mailing list to start a vote. |
|
Higher up in this doc, can you please make this change:
|
|
For uses of the word "variant" outside of code, please standardize the case on "Variant" or "variant" consistently. Right now it's a mix. |
Co-authored-by: Ian Cook <ianmcook@gmail.com>
| .. note:: | ||
|
|
||
| Notice that there is a variant ``literal null`` in the ``value`` array, this is due to the | ||
| `shredding specification <https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/VariantShredding.md#value-shredding>`__ | ||
| so that a consumer can tell the difference between a *missing* field and a **null** field. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We implicitly describe nulls here and then explicitly describe it below; would it make sense to explicitly introduce nulls first (and link to the docs) and then omit both of the other explanations?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the updated version better?
|
Sorry I have been out the last week -- I will review this shortly |
|
For anyone who missed it this proposal was voted and approved: https://lists.apache.org/thread/44o0d3nvxx0y3fzoschny96k5f3mzvlb (thank you @zeroshade for driving this) |
|
Once we have consensus and approval here, we can merge this. Can everyone please take a look and try to comment on this (or give approval) by the end of the week? |
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
looks good to me -- thank you @zeroshade for driving this
we have made good use of the extension type draft documentation in arrow-rs
FYI @scovich, @klion26 @codephage2020 @carpecodeum and @liamzwbao as you have contributed to the arrow-rs implementation and might be interested
|
@github-actions crossbow submit preview-docs |
|
Revision: 44da918 Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-fdb42d9677
|
codephage2020
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks Good To Me! Thank you!
Co-authored-by: Yan Tingwang <tingwangyan2020@163.com>
|
Thanks everyone for the reviews and assistance making this happen! |
|
After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 4 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 6c0c3cd. There weren't enough matching historic benchmark results to make a call on whether there were regressions. The full Conbench report has more details. |
Rationale for this change
To support the addition of the Parquet Variant data type and the Iceberg adoption of the variant type, we need a defined way to pass this data through Arrow-compatible systems. As such, we need a specification for a canonical Arrow extension type to represent Variant data.
What changes are included in this PR?
Updates to the docs which define the Arrow Variant Extension type