t; >> cancel_descriptor for use outside the stream.)
> > >> >>
> > >> >> About CloseQuery:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I think that it would be great if the RPC call is in Flight RPC
> > rather
> > >> than
> >
nfo/PollFlightInfo in Flight RPC. In that case, maybe it
> >> would be
> >> >> nice to name it 'CloseFlightInfo', to be matched with GetFlightInfo.
> >> >>
> >> >> About RefreshQuery:
> >> >>
> >> >>
ame it 'CloseFlightInfo', to be matched with GetFlightInfo.
>> >>
>> >> About RefreshQuery:
>> >>
>> >> Same as CloseQuery. Maybe it can be named 'RetainFlightInfo'.
>> >>
>> >> About CancelQuery:
>> &
t; >> completed, doesn't it?
> >>
> >> Another (unrelated?) request (not in the proposal):
> >>
> >> In DoGet, the client must consume the whole endpoint. It can make it
> >> difficult for a client who only wants to or can retrieve only a small
>
t. (For example, there may be a web client that displays the
>> result in tabular format page-by-page. A web server can cache the DoGet
>> result, but by doing that the web server must manage a state. A stateful web
>> server is harder to implement and manage.) Can we have a variant of D
t; that only retrieves a portion of an endpoint? That RPC method can have
> record_offset and record_count arguments. (Maybe it defeats the purpose of
> Flight RPC which prefers fast, bulk transfer.)
>
> Thank you.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: David Li
> Sent: Wednesday,
at RPC method can have
record_offset and record_count arguments. (Maybe it defeats the purpose of
Flight RPC which prefers fast, bulk transfer.)
Thank you.
-Original Message-
From: David Li
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 8:06 AM
To: dev@arrow.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Fli
Ah, right. I haven't written up the last set of ADBC proposals yet. I'll do
that in the next day or two.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023, at 17:38, Will Jones wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> The proposals in the Flight/Flight SQL document look excellent. As I've
> been looking at ADBC I've been wondering about polli
Hi David,
The proposals in the Flight/Flight SQL document look excellent. As I've
been looking at ADBC I've been wondering about polling / async execution,
cancellation, and progress indicators. Glad to see those in the Flight
document, but where are they in the ADBC issues? Do they still need to
Hello,
I would like to submit some Flight RPC and Flight SQL enhancements for
discussion. They cover the following:
- Executing 'queries' in a retryable, nonblocking way
- Handling ordered result sets
- Handling expiration of/re-reading result sets
In addition, there are corresponding proposals
10 matches
Mail list logo
