+1 (non-binding).
P.S. Copy and paste error on the plus 1 option from the flight vote?
On Wednesday, April 3, 2019, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'd like to propose a change to the Arrow format to support a new duration
> type. Details below. Threads on mailing list around discussion.
>
>
> // An absolute length of time unrelated to any calendar artifacts. For the
> purposes
> /// of Arrow Implementations, adding this value to a Timestamp ("t1")
> naively (i.e. simply summing
> /// the two number) is acceptable even though in some cases the resulting
> Timestamp (t2) would
> /// not account for leap-seconds during the elapsed time between "t1" and
> "t2". Similarly, representing
> /// the difference between two Unix timestamp is acceptable, but would
> yield a value that is possibly a few seconds
> /// off from the true elapsed time.
> ///
> /// The resolution defaults to
> /// millisecond, but can be any of the other supported TimeUnit values as
> /// with Timestamp and Time types. This type is always represented as
> /// an 8-byte integer.
> table DurationInterval {
> unit: TimeUnit = MILLISECOND;
> }
>
>
> Please vote whether to accept the changes. The vote will be open
> for at least 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Accept these changes to the Flight protocol
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 Do not accept the changes because...
>
