Thanks all. Can we scope the work that would be required to implement
the described change (making interval a 64-bit integer for the
DAY_TIME variety, and adding unit metadata)? I suppose mainly Dremio
would be moderately disrupted by this
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
> M
My analysis previously (if I recall) was basically (I think I did it on the
similar Parquet PR) was that no system truly supported N fields for all
operations (postgres was closest I believe). Some basic operations would
maintain them but they would quickly not behave differently (e.g. 24 hours
is
I have argued before on this list, and still believe, that you should
represent an interval as you would a number. If intervals are 64 bit
signed, then sure, use the 64 bit integer representation; if you were
to allow intervals with fixed precision and scale, then use the same
representation as for
Makes sense. The key question is whether the data is represented as a
single 64-bit integer or as effectively a C struct
struct {
int32_t days;
int32_t milliseconds;
}
The struct representation cannot accommodate higher resolution units
like microseconds and nanoseconds. From my perspective,
I don't know many examples of interval being used in the real world.
But here's the kind of thing: the policy is that an offer is open for
60 hours, so if the offer is made to a particular customer at 12:34pm
on Sunday, you want to compute that it ends at 12:34am on Wednesday.
The interval "60 hour
Pleading ignorance on use of the SQL interval type, my prior would be
that many algorithms would first convert the interval components into
an absolute timedelta. Is that not the case?
My preference right now would be to have a single Interval type, where
the DAY_TIME type actually contains an abs
I'm all for moving interval to the new definition. I think we should avoid
introducing a timedelta type until it is really important. We need several
users demanding a type before we should implement it. Otherwise, we have
huge amounts of type bloat (which means nothing will fully implement the
spe
As I understand it, the proposal is to have both an interval data type[1] and a
timedelta type[2]. The interval is compatible with the SQL standard (but not
Postgres) and can be implemented with a single numeric value representing a
particular time unit (year, month, day, hour, minute, second,
It seems like we don't have enough input on this topic to make a
decision right now. I placed the JIRA ARROW-352 in the 0.9.0
milestone, but we really should try to get this done soon so that
downstream users are not blocked on using Arrow to send around
interval data.
- Wes
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017
+1 on this one.
My reason is this makes timestamp/interval calculation faster, i.e,
"timestamp + interval < timestamp" should be faster without dealing with
two component in interval. Although I am not quite sure about the rational
behind the two component representation, which seems to be what is
I opened this patch over 2 months ago to add some additional metadata
for intervals:
https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/920
Java supports a two-component DAY_TIME interval type as a combo of
days and milliseconds:
https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/402baa4ec391b61dd37c770ae7978d51b9b550fa/ja
11 matches
Mail list logo
