As I recall TFX developers weighed in that this would be helpful for TensorFlow-related use cases where they are concerns about C++ ABI compatibility. Since this project has been ongoing for about 5 months (see also related discussion around implementation guidelines for third parties [1]) there has been a lot of time for people to have a look
[1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b7c2094ac4e11ffce46914b603e16b6bba8f235bc6465f3ab6d320d5%40%3Cdev.arrow.apache.org%3E On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 11:19 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I reviewed the spec again (not the implementation). I'm +1 on this. > > I was wondering if we shared/received feedback on this with any other > communities? > > Thanks, > Micah > > > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 8:13 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I will try to review tomorrow and cast a vote. > > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 5:41 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> There is only 1 binding +1 vote so far, we should probably wait for > >> three before closing the vote (it's possible that lazy consensus could > >> be employed here but not much harm in waiting a few more days) > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:15 PM Francois Saint-Jacques > >> <fsaintjacq...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > +1 > >> > > >> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 9:08 PM Fan Liya <liya.fa...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > +1 (binding) > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 11:52 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > +1 (binding) > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:29 PM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Ah, you're right, it's PR 6040: > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/6040 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Similarly, the C++ implementation is at PR 6026: > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/6026 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Regards > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Antoine. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Le 11/02/2020 à 23:17, Wes McKinney a écrit : > >> > > > > > hi Antoine, PR 5442 seems to no longer be the right one. Which > >> open PR > >> > > > > > contains the specification now? > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 1:06 PM Antoine Pitrou < > >> anto...@python.org> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Hello, > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> We have been discussing the creation of a minimalist C-based > >> data > >> > > > > >> interface for applications to exchange Arrow columnar data > >> structures > >> > > > > >> with each other. Some notable features of this interface > >> include: > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> * A small amount of header-only C code can be copied > >> independently > >> > > > into > >> > > > > >> third-party libraries and downstream applications, no > >> dependencies are > >> > > > > >> needed even on Arrow C++ itself (notably, it is not required > >> to use > >> > > > > >> Flatbuffers, though there are trade-offs resulting from this). > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> * Low development investment (in other words: limited-scope > >> use cases > >> > > > > >> can be accomplished with little code), so as to enable C or C++ > >> > > > > >> libraries to export Arrow columnar data with minimal code. > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> * Data lifetime management hooks so as to properly handle > >> non-trivial > >> > > > > >> data sharing (for example passing Arrow columnar data to an > >> async > >> > > > > >> processing consumer). > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> This "C Data Interface" serves different use cases from the > >> > > > > >> language-independent IPC protocol and trades away a number of > >> features > >> > > > > >> in the interest of minimalism / simplicity. It is not a > >> replacement > >> > > > for > >> > > > > >> the IPC protocol and will only be used to interchange > >> in-process data > >> > > > at > >> > > > > >> C or C++ call sites. > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> The PR providing the specification is here: > >> > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/5442 > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> In particular, you can read the spec document here: > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> https://github.com/pitrou/arrow/blob/doc-c-data-interface2/docs/source/format/CDataInterface.rst > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> A fairly comprehensive C++ implementation of this > >> demonstrating its > >> > > > > >> use is found here: > >> > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/5608 > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> (note that other applications implementing the interface may > >> choose to > >> > > > > >> only support a few features and thus have far less code to > >> write) > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Please vote to adopt the SPECIFICATION (GitHub PR #5442). > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> [ ] +1 Adopt C Data Interface specification > >> > > > > >> [ ] +0 > >> > > > > >> [ ] -1 Do not adopt because... > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Thank you > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Regards > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> Antoine. > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> (PS: yes, this is in large part a copy/paste of Wes's previous > >> vote > >> > > > > >> email :-)) > >> > > > > >> > >
