@Antoine i'll update the comment in the .proto file to make it explicit that there's no implied/inherent relationship required between the app_metadata for a FlightInfo and the corresponding FlightEndpoint/FlightData messages.
That gives 3 +1 votes, no -1 votes. So the vote passes. Thanks everyone! I'll add the comment and then merge the PR. --Matt On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 12:17 PM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > +1 from me. It might be worth spelling out whether any relationship is > expected between the `app_metadata` for a FlightInfo and any of the > corresponding `FlightEndpoint`s and `FlightData` chunks. > > > Le 12/09/2023 à 17:48, Matt Topol a écrit : > > Hey all, > > > > I would like to propose adding a new app_metadata field to both the > > FlightInfo and FlightEndpoint message types of the Arrow Flight protocol. > > There has been discussion of doing so for a while and has now been > brought > > back up in regards to [1]. More specifically, this enables adding > > application defined metadata for FlightSQL (by way of FlightInfo) which > can > > then be utilized to pass information such as QueryID, QueryCost, etc. > > > > I've put up a PR to add this at [2]. > > > > The vote will be open for at least 24 hours: > > > > [ ] +1 Add these fields to the Arrow Flight RPC protocol > > [ ] +0 > > [ ] -1 Do not add these fields to the Arrow Flight RPC protocol > because.... > > > > Thanks much! > > --Matt > > > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/37635 > > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/37679 > > >
