If non-PMC can vote, I'll also give a huge +1 On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 11:34 AM Matthew Topol <m...@voltrondata.com.invalid> wrote:
> I'm not PMC but i'll give a +1 (non-binding) vote. I like the idea of > integrating Substrait plans into Flight SQL if possible and it aligns > with the arrow-adbc work. > > On Thu, Sep 8 2022 at 11:31:59 AM -0400, David Li <lidav...@apache.org> > wrote: > > My vote: +1 (binding) > > > > Are any other PMC members available to take a look? > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2022, at 09:18, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > >> Fair enough. For the record, my main concern with ad-hoc conventions > >> such as "number of milliseconds expressed as an integer" is the poor > >> usability and the potential for confusion (not to mention that > >> sometimes > >> the need for a higher precision can lead to add another set of > >> APIs, but > >> that's unlikely to be the case here :-)). > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Antoine. > >> > >> > >> Le 07/09/2022 à 14:21, David Li a écrit : > >>> Absent further comments on this I would rather avoid adding a > >>> potentially breaking (even if likely compatible) change to the > >>> schema of this endpoint, if that's acceptable. I don't think a > >>> millisecond timeout is all too different from floating-point > >>> seconds (especially at the scale of network RPCs). > >>> > >>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2022, at 12:44, David Li wrote: > >>>> We could add a new type code to the union. Presumably consumers > >>>> would > >>>> just error on or ignore such values (the libraries just hand the > >>>> Arrow > >>>> array to the application, so it's up to the application what to > >>>> do with > >>>> an unknown type code). (And for a new consumer talking to an old > >>>> server, the new type code would just never come up, so the only > >>>> issue > >>>> would be if it strictly validates the returned schema.) > >>>> > >>>> If there's support, I can make this revision as well. > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2022, at 12:37, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > >>>>> Le 06/09/2022 à 17:21, David Li a écrit : > >>>>>> Thanks Antoine! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I've updated the PR (except for the comment about timeout > >>>>>> units, since SqlInfo values can't be doubles/floats unless we > >>>>>> change the schema there) > >>>>> > >>>>> Can we change the schema in a backwards-compatible way? > >
