-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 208
feat(c/include/arrow-adbc): Add AdbcStatementRequestSchema #3623
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
4dfe808
request schema
paleolimbot f9cea38
add more language
paleolimbot 6fc5218
remove negotiation garbage
paleolimbot 120da6c
add stub
paleolimbot d2051a9
maybe put things in the right place
paleolimbot fb85d96
maybe language on intended column fidelity
paleolimbot fd08d4b
pre-commit
lidavidm File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Oops, something went wrong.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we explicitly define the behavior if columns in the result schema are missing from the requested schema and the reverse (columns in the requested schema missing from the result schema)?
What about column ordering? I'm not making any suggestions about what the behavior should be, just that we should explicitly state what the expected behavior should be in those cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point...I will try to update the text tonight. Off the top of my head the ability to request a schema with more columns than the source or in a different order is useful, as is widening the allowed nullability. Requesting fewer columns is fishy. DataFusion has quite a nice programmatic definition of this (designed for casting struct columns to match each other, possibly from multiple Parquet files).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What's the status here?
Personally I'm fine saying that you have to match (at least to start), though allowing widened nullability seems fine, and if there's a use case we can define the rest. Reordering columns and such to me starts to feel like #13 a bit. If only everyone supported Substrait, things would be easy :P
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I forgot about this...I'll put the language in sometime today. The intention is to align types in place for drivers where the inferred destination type is arbitrary, not to reorder (which places responsibility on the driver that's currently tricky to satisfy in C or C++).