Hello team, I have already updated the google doc:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wjFsBdlV2YK75x7UOk2HhDOqWVA0yC7iEiqOMnNnxlA/edit?usp=sharing.
If all looks good, I will raise a vote later this week. Thank you!
Qi Tan 于2025年3月18日周二 21:39写道：
> Hello Reynold, I truly appreciate your time
Hello Reynold, I truly appreciate your time and attention to this feature. For
the performance, here are my thoughts:
* As Serge mentioned above, Apache Spark needs to be aligned with other
competitive products. We should not overlook potential benefits just because of
performance regression.
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 于2025年3月27日周四 15:12写道：
> Hello Qi,
>
> I'm supportive of the NanoSecond Timestamps proposal;
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://issue
. Huaxin was kind enough to shepherd this effort.
Thanks for your attention. Any feedback is more than welcome!
Qi Tan
t;>>> here.
>>>> - it has common/standard processing methods. The java datetime library
>>>> Spark is using now already support nanosecond, so we are fine here.
>>>>
>>>> I think the key issue is the format. The proposed 10-byte format
>>&g
