Thanks!!! DB Tsai | https://www.dbtsai.com/ | PGP 42E5B25A8F7A82C1
> On Mar 27, 2025, at 3:56 PM, Qi Tan <qi.tan.j...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks DB, > > I just noticed a few more comments came in after I initiated the vote. I'm > going to postpone the voting process and address those outstanding comments. > > Qi Tan > > DB Tsai <dbt...@dbtsai.com <mailto:dbt...@dbtsai.com>> 于2025年3月27日周四 15:12写道： >> Hello Qi, >> I'm supportive of the NanoSecond Timestamps proposal; however, before we >> initiate the vote, there are a few outstanding comments in the SPIP document >> that haven't been addressed yet. Since the vote is on the document itself, >> could we resolve these items beforehand? >> >> For example: >> >> The default precision of TimestampNsNTZType is set to 6, which overlaps with >> the existing TimestampNTZ. >> >> The specified range exceeds the capacity of an int64, but the document >> doesn't clarify how this type will be represented in memory or serialized in >> data sources. >> >> Schema inference details for data sources are missing. >> >> These points still need discussion. >> >> I appreciate your efforts in putting the doc together and look forward to >> your contribution! >> >> Thanks, >> >> DB Tsai | https://www.dbtsai.com/ | PGP 42E5B25A8F7A82C1 >> >>> On Mar 27, 2025, at 1:24 PM, huaxin gao <huaxin.ga...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:huaxin.ga...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 1:22 PM Qi Tan <qi.tan.j...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:qi.tan.j...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I would like to start a vote on adding support for nanoseconds timestamps. >>>> >>>> Discussion thread: >>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/y2vzrjl1499j5dvbpg3m81jxdhf4b6of >>>> SPIP: >>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wjFsBdlV2YK75x7UOk2HhDOqWVA0yC7iEiqOMnNnxlA/edit?usp=sharing >>>> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-50532 >>>> >>>> Please vote on the SPIP for the next 72 hours: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1: Accept the proposal as an official SPIP >>>> [ ] +0 >>>> [ ] -1: I don’t think this is a good idea because >>
