Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
ORC-1717: Add geometry and geography types - #18
Conversation
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Jul 19, 2024
Thank you, @wgtmac . Is it for Apache ORC 1.1.0? If this is final, I'm +1. |
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Jul 19, 2024
Also, cc @williamhyun |
wgtmac
commented
Jul 19, 2024
@dongjoon-hyun This is not finalized yet. I will update it once ready. |
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Jul 19, 2024
Thank you! If it's finalized, please send a head-up email to dev@orc once more. |
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Aug 22, 2024
Thank you for updating. Is this ready, @wgtmac ? |
wgtmac
commented
Aug 22, 2024
Yes, I believe so. And I will start PoC implementations later. |
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Aug 22, 2024
Got it. When do you want to release
|
wgtmac
commented
Aug 22, 2024
I think we can wait until both Java and C++ PoC implementations are finished. |
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Aug 22, 2024
+1 for the decision. Thank you for the confirmation. |
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Apr 4, 2025
Thank you. Is this ready, @wgtmac ? |
wgtmac
commented
Apr 7, 2025
Yes, this is ready for review @dongjoon-hyun cc @ffacs |
| optional TimestampStatistics timestampStatistics = 9; | ||
| optional bool hasNull = 10; | ||
| optional uint64 bytes_on_disk = 11; | ||
| optional CollectionStatistics collection_statistics = 12; |
| // Statistics specific to Geometry or Geography type | ||
| message GeospatialStatistics { | ||
| // A bounding box of geospatial instances | ||
| optional BoundingBox bbox = 1; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is bbox a well-known name? I'm just wondering if we can use bounding_box like the other field names.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, bbox is a well-known geospatial acronym.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you, @wgtmac .
I have three comments.
bytes_on_diskandcollection_statistics(https://github.com/apache/orc-format/pull/18/files#r2032264096)bbox(https://github.com/apache/orc-format/pull/18/files#r2032265481)- This PR is proposed to support Apache Iceberg. However, are you sure that Apache Iceberg community keeps Apache ORC support in the next table format?
If we are not sure about (3), let's revise the PR description by avoiding mentioning Apache Iceberg community.m
I believe this PR itself has enough meaning independently to Apache ORC community. I'm +1 for this additional feature.
cc @williamhyun too
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Apr 9, 2025
Gentle ping, @wgtmac . |
wgtmac
commented
Apr 9, 2025
I'm not sure about the long-term goal. The recent discussion w.r.t the file format API still considers Apache ORC: https://lists.apache.org/thread/ovyh52m2b6c1hrg4fhw3rx92bzr793n2 |
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Apr 9, 2025
Thank you, @wgtmac . I'm referring the latest Apache Iceberg community sync-up meeting on March 16th which superseded the above discussion on February 12th. |
Thanks for the info! I just watched that video and understand the concern from the Iceberg community. There are several issues like missing features (variant, geometry, etc.) and implementation (default values, schema evolution, etc.) For the latter issue, does anyone in the Apache ORC community know the detail? |
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1, LGTM. Thank you for updating, @wgtmac .
dongjoon-hyun
commented
Apr 9, 2025
Since this is an improvement without a breaking change, shall we release as Apache ORC v1.1.0? WDYT, @wgtmac ? |
wgtmac
commented
Apr 10, 2025
@dongjoon-hyun Sounds good! I think this can help the implementation a lot. |
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to upgrade ORC Format to 1.1.0. ### Why are the changes needed? To bring the latest feature and bug fixes. - https://github.com/apache/orc-format/milestone/2?closed=1 - apache/orc-format#18 - apache/orc-format#19 ### How was this patch tested? Pass the CIs. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes#2190 from dongjoon-hyun/ORC-1876. Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to upgrade ORC Format to 1.1.0. ### Why are the changes needed? To bring the latest feature and bug fixes. - https://github.com/apache/orc-format/milestone/2?closed=1 - apache/orc-format#18 - apache/orc-format#19 ### How was this patch tested? Pass the CIs. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes#2190 from dongjoon-hyun/ORC-1876. Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org> (cherry picked from commit f5e2413) Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to upgrade Apache ORC Format to 1.1.0 from 1.1.0 for Apache Spark 4.1.0. ### Why are the changes needed? Apache ORC Format v1.1.0 is released on 2025-04-18. - https://github.com/apache/orc-format/releases/tag/v1.1.0 To bring the latest feature and bug fixes. - https://github.com/apache/orc-format/milestone/2?closed=1 - apache/orc-format#18 - apache/orc-format#19 ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No, there is no behavior change. ### How was this patch tested? Pass the CIs. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes#50588 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-51801. Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Add geometry and geography types to Apache ORC.
Why are the changes needed?
Geospatial support is a missing feature and it is supported by many popular databases, query engines, computing frameworks, etc.
How was this patch tested?
N/A