Hi All,
I'd like to bump this thread for more discussion.
There is current a Java PR to make the current union type match the spec:
https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/987. Since there is a need for a
"simple union" , i.e., a union that can only have one of each "minor type"
and have fixed type
Hey Li,
In Ray we need the second type of union, since there can be arbitrary
nesting.
-- Philipp.
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Li Jin wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I'd like to bump this thread to get some more feedbacks from other people.
> I think what Wes says makes sense, there seems to be two
Hi All,
I'd like to bump this thread to get some more feedbacks from other people.
I think what Wes says makes sense, there seems to be two requirement for
union types and it might make sense to make them different types.
I think Dremio has more use case for the first type of union. I think Ray
a
hi all,
So one of the conflicts that keeps coming up re: unions is the
following two notions:
* A union as a "variant of primitives" type. Here, values are
constrained to be one of Arrow's primitive types (integer, floating
point, string, boolean, etc.). The value types are statically declared
an
