GH-2967: Support unified config options for convert parquet-cli

[ArnavBalyan]

• Added --conf parameter that accepts user's key=value configuration pairs
• users can now configure any Avro/Parquet setting via CLI.
• The conf can be passed any number of times with the user defined values and will be appended to the internally constructed config.
• Fixes: Providing parquet-avro configuration to parquet-cli #2967

[ArnavBalyan]

cc @gszadovszky@shangxinli could you please review thanks!

[gszadovszky]

This is a great improvement. Thanks a lot for working on it!

I have two ideas to improve it:

• What do you think about adding the conf support centrally for every commands by setting it in Main?
• Maybe adding an additional option that supports reading a config file (and the config pairs at command line can override these values)?

[ArnavBalyan]

This is a great improvement. Thanks a lot for working on it!

I have two ideas to improve it:

• What do you think about adding the conf support centrally for every commands by setting it in Main?
• Maybe adding an additional option that supports reading a config file (and the config pairs at command line can override these values)?

Thanks for the review and great suggestions! I'll address them shortly.
Supporting it centrally for every command is a great point, let me check how we can wire it for all commands.
Will add support for the config file also thanks!

[ArnavBalyan]

Added global config support through Main, can I take the file based config feature in a follow up PR or should we add it here @gszadovszky? thanks!

[gszadovszky]

Added global config support through Main, can I take the file based config feature in a follow up PR or should we add it here @gszadovszky? thanks!

@ArnavBalyan, it is up to you. It was just an improvement idea. I'm fine having it in a separate PR.

[ArnavBalyan]

Added global config support through Main, can I take the file based config feature in a follow up PR or should we add it here @gszadovszky? thanks!

@ArnavBalyan, it is up to you. It was just an improvement idea. I'm fine having it in a separate PR.

The file based config would probably be very useful, I can take it up in a follow up PR, will go through more code to understand where it can be best added thanks

[gszadovszky]

@ArnavBalyan, unfortunately, we do not have end-to-end tests for parquet-cli. Were you able to validate this manually?

• Are the conf key-value pairs really reach the related code path at different commands?
• Is the --conf argument properly described in the help?

It looks good to me otherwise.

[ArnavBalyan]

@ArnavBalyan, unfortunately, we do not have end-to-end tests for parquet-cli. Were you able to validate this manually?

• Are the conf key-value pairs really reach the related code path at different commands?
• Is the --conf argument properly described in the help?

It looks good to me otherwise.

Thank you so much for the review, I'll check if we can add some more end to end tests for the CLI. I verified manually that the configs are correctly reaching the other side to the command, example output from one of the manual logs:

log4j:WARN See http://logging.apache.org/log4j/1.2/faq.html#noconfig for more info.
=== CONVERT COMMAND CONFIGURATION RECEIVED ===
CONFIG: parquet.avro.write-parquet-uuid = true
CONFIG: parquet.avro.write-old-list-structure = false
CONFIG: test.property = test.value
Total configuration properties available: 925
=== END CONVERT COMMAND CONFIGURATION ===
[INFO] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 1.413 s -- in org.apache.parquet

The above configs were passed through the --config option.

It seems to be well described in help, pls let me know if we should add anything else thanks!

[ArnavBalyan]

cc @gszadovszky can this be merged if all looks good? Have raised #3296 to introduce e2e testing thanks!

[gszadovszky]

Thanks for the ping, @ArnavBalyan. I usually don't like merging just when I'm approving to give some time for other comments. But 3 days are more than enough...

[ArnavBalyan]

Thanks for the ping, @ArnavBalyan. I usually don't like merging just when I'm approving to give some time for other comments. But 3 days are more than enough...

Oh got it thanks! 👍