Hi! I wonder if it were possible to have generic interval with integers of specified size just to have common base for interval arithmetic.
Then user can convert their period to ordinals and use the arithmetic (joining, deoverlapping, common parts, explosion etc.). So YEAR_MONTH and DAY_TIME would be just special cases of INTERVAL_UINT32 and INTERVAL_UINT64 Also I believe it is worth to state whether there are only closed intervals or open/semi-open ones are allowed as well. I believe I am just one of many reinventing the wheel here and writing own versions of the above. BR, Jacek pt., 2 kwi 2021 o 21:53 Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> napisał(a): > > Andrew is the use-case you have simply postgres compatibility or is it more > extensive? > > One potential problem with combining Month and Day fields, is that the type > no longer has a defined sort order (the existing Day-Millisecond type > without assumptions, in particular because I don't think today there is an > explicit constraint on the bounds for the millisecond component). > > -Micah > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:03 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > > > > Le 31/03/2021 à 17:55, Micah Kornfield a écrit : > > > Thanks for the feedback. A couple of points here and some responses > > below. > > > > > > * One other question is whether the Nanoseconds should actually be > > > configurable (i.e. use milliseconds or microseconds). I would lean > > towards > > > no. > > > > Same for me. > > > > > * I'm also still not 100% convinced we need this as a first class type in > > > arrow or if we should be looking more closely at the Struct (in the Arrow > > > sense) based implementation. In the future where alternative encodings > > are > > > supported, this could allow for much smaller footprints for this type. > > > > Having a "packed" first class type allows for better locality when > > accessing data. It doesn't sound very likely that you'd access only one > > component of the interval. > > > > But I have no idea how important this is, and temporal datetypes are > > generally cumbersome to add support for (conversions, arithmetic, etc.), > > so it would be nice to avoid adding too many of them :-) > > > > Regards > > > > Antoine. > > > > > > > > > > > > The 3 > > >> field implementation doesn't seem to have any way to represent integral > > >> days, so I am also not sure about that one. > > > > > > > > > Sorry this was an email gaffe. I intended Month (32 bit int), Day (32 > > bit > > > int), Nanosecond (64 bit int). > > > > > > OTOH I don't really understand the point of supporting "the most > > >> reasonable ranges for Year, Month and Nanoseconds independently". What > > >> does it bring to encode more than one month in the nanoseconds field? > > > > > > > > > I'm happy with simplicity. In the past there has been some reference to > > > people wanting to store very large timestamps (fall out of Nanoseconds > > max > > > representable value) but we've concluded that this wasn't something that > > we > > > wanted to really support. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 4:49 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> I would favour the following characteristics : > > >> - support for nanoseconds (especially as other Arrow temporal types > > >> support it) > > >> - easy to handle (which excludes the ZetaSQL representtaion IMHO) > > >> > > >> OTOH I don't really understand the point of supporting "the most > > >> reasonable ranges for Year, Month and Nanoseconds independently". What > > >> does it bring to encode more than one month in the nanoseconds field? > > >> You can already use the Duration type for that. > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> > > >> Antoine. > > >> > > >> > > >> Le 31/03/2021 à 05:48, Micah Kornfield a écrit : > > >>> To follow-up on this conversation I did some analysis on interval > > types: > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i1E_fdQ_xODZcAhsV11Pfq27O50k679OYHXFJpm9NS0/edit > > >> Please feel free to add more details/systems I missed. > > >>> > > >>> Given the disparate requirements of different systems I think the > > >> following might make sense for official types (if there isn't > > consensus, I > > >> might try to contributation extension Array implementations for them to > > >> Java and C++/Python separately). > > >>> > > >>> 1. 3 fields: Year (32 bit), Month (32 bit), Nanoseconds (64 bit) all > > >> signed. > > >>> 2. Postgres representation (Downside is it doesn't support > > Nanoseconds, > > >> only microseconds). > > >>> 3. ZetaSQL implementation (Requires some bit manipulation) but > > supports > > >> the most reasonable ranges for Year, Month and Nanoseconds > > independently. > > >>> > > >>> Thoughts? > > >>> > > >>> Micah > > >>> > > >>> On 2021/02/18 04:30:55 Micah Kornfield wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I didn’t find any page/documentation on how to do RFC in Arrow > > >> protocol, > > >>>>> so can anyone point me to it or PR with email will be enough? > > >>>> > > >>>> That is enough to start discussion. Before formal acceptance and > > >> merging > > >>>> of the PR there needs to be a Java and C++ implementations for the > > type > > >>>> that pass integration tests. At the time this guideline was > > instituted > > >>>> Java and C++ were considered the "reference" implementations (I think > > >> they > > >>>> still have the most complete integration test coverage). > > >>>> > > >>>> My understanding is that the current modelling of intervals mimics SQL > > >>>> standards (e.g. SQL Server [1]). So it would also be good to step > > back > > >> and > > >>>> understand what problem DF is trying to solve and how it differs from > > >> other > > >>>> SQL implementations. I'd be hesitant to accept COMPLEX as a new type > > >>>> without a much deeper analysis into calendar representations within > > >> Arrow > > >>>> and how they relate to other existing systems (e.g. Hive and some > > >>>> assortment of existing SQL databases). For instance the current > > >> modelling > > >>>> of timestamps does not lend itself to constructing a COMPLEX interval > > >> type > > >>>> particularly well. (Duration was introduced for this reason). > > >>>> > > >>>> I think both Wes's suggestion of FixedSizeBinary and Andrew's of > > >> composing > > >>>> the with a struct are good stop-gaps. These obviously have different > > >>>> trade-offs. Ultimately, it would be good to define common extension > > >> types > > >>>> that can represent this use-case if there really is demand for it (if > > it > > >>>> doesn't become a top level type). > > >>>> > > >>>> [1] > > >>>> > > >> > > https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/odbc/reference/appendixes/interval-data-types?view=sql-server-ver15 > > >>>> > > >>>> -Micah > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 2:05 PM Andrew Lamb <al...@influxdata.com> > > >> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> That is a great suggestion Wes, thank you. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I wonder if we could get away with a 128 bit representation that is > > the > > >>>>> concatenation of the two existing interval types > > (YearMonth)(DayTime). > > >> Or > > >>>>> maybe even define a `struct` type with those fields that is used by > > >>>>> DataFusion. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Basically, given our reading of the Arrow spec[1], it is currently > > not > > >>>>> possible to precisely represent an interval that has both monthly and > > >>>>> sub-montly granularity. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> As Dmtry says, if you have an interval seemingly simple like 1 > > month, > > >> 1 > > >>>>> day > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Using IntervalUnit(YEAR_MONTH) can't represent the 1 day > > >>>>> Using IntervalUnit(DAY_TIME) can't represent the month as different > > >> months > > >>>>> have different numbers of days > > >>>>> > > >>>>> [1] > > >>>>> > > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/master/format/Schema.fbs#L249-L260 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 5:01 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 3:46 PM <t...@dmtry.me> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> It's unclear to me that this needs to be introduced into the > > >>>>> top-level > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Similar thing to columnar format, How to store interval like 1 > > month > > >> 1 > > >>>>>> day 1 hour? It’s not possible to do it without converting 1 month to > > >> 30 > > >>>>>> days, which is a bad way. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Presumably you can represent a complex interval in a fixed number of > > >>>>>> bytes, and then embed the data in a FixedSizeBinary type. You can > > >>>>>> adorn this type with extension type metadata so that DataFusion can > > >>>>>> then apply Interval semantics to it. This could also serve as an > > >>>>>> interim strategy for you to proceed with implementation while > > >>>>>> proposing a top-level type to the Arrow format (which may or may not > > >>>>>> be accepting) so you aren't blocked on acceptance of changes into > > >>>>>> Schema.fbs. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On 17 Feb 2021, at 21:02, Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> It's unclear to me that this needs to be introduced into the > > >>>>> top-level > > >>>>>>>> columnar format without more analysis — have you considered > > >>>>>>>> implementing this for DataFusion as an extension type for the time > > >>>>>>>> being? > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 11:59 AM t...@dmtry.me <mailto: > > >> t...@dmtry.me > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> <t...@dmtry.me <mailto:t...@dmtry.me>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> For now, There are only two types of IntervalUnit inside Arrow: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> - YearMonth - month stored as int32 > > >>>>>>>>> - DayTime - days as int32 and time in milliseconds as in32. > > Total > > >>>>>> (64 bites) > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Since DF is using Arrow, It’s not possible to store “Complex” > > >>>>>> intervals such 1 MONTH 1 DAY 1 HOUR. > > >>>>>>>>> I think, the best way to understand the problem will be to read a > > >>>>>> comment from DF codebase: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/bca7d2fe84ccd8fc1129cb4d85448eb0779c52c3/rust/datafusion/src/sql/planner.rs#L1148 > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> // Interval is tricky thing > > >>>>>>>>> // 1 day is not 24 hours because timezones, 1 year != > > >>>>> 365/364! > > >>>>>> 30 days != 1 month > > >>>>>>>>> // The true way to store and calculate intervals is to > > >> store > > >>>>>> it as it defined > > >>>>>>>>> // Due the fact that Arrow supports only two types > > >> YearMonth > > >>>>>> (month) and DayTime (day, time) > > >>>>>>>>> // It's not possible to store complex intervals > > >>>>>>>>> // It's possible to do select (NOW() + INTERVAL '1 > > year') + > > >>>>>> INTERVAL '1 day'; as workaround > > >>>>>>>>> if result_month != 0 && (result_days != 0 || > > result_millis > > >> != > > >>>>>> 0) { > > >>>>>>>>> return Err(DataFusionError::NotImplemented(format!( > > >>>>>>>>> "DF does not support intervals that have both a > > >>>>>> Year/Month part as well as Days/Hours/Mins/Seconds: {:?}. Hint: try > > >>>>>> breaking the interval into two parts, one with Year/Month and the > > >> other > > >>>>>> with Days/Hours/Mins/Seconds - e.g. (NOW() + INTERVAL '1 year') + > > >>>>> INTERVAL > > >>>>>> '1 day'", > > >>>>>>>>> value > > >>>>>>>>> ))); > > >>>>>>>>> } > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> I prepared a PR https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9516/files > > < > > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9516/files> < > > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9516/files < > > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/9516/files>> that introduce a > > >> new > > >>>>>> type for IntervalUnit called Complex, that store both YearMonth and > > >>>>> DayTime > > >>>>>> to support complex interval. > > >>>>>>>>> I didn’t find any page/documentation on how to do RFC in Arrow > > >>>>>> protocol, so can anyone point me to it or PR with email will be > > >> enough? > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > > >
