Frankly it was from a "not drastically refactoring things" perspective :)
At least for Arrow: list[utf8] is effectively a utf8 array with an extra array of offsets, so there's relatively little overhead. (In particular, there's not an extra allocation per array; there's just an overall allocation of a bitmap/offsets buffer.) On Thu, Sep 22, 2022, at 13:46, Gavin Ray wrote: > I suppose you're thinking from a memory/performance perspective right? > Allocating a dot character is a lot better than allocating multiple arrays > > Yeah I don't see why not -- this could even be a library internal where the > fact that it's dotted is an implementation detail > Then in the Java implementation or whatnot, you can call > ".getFullyQualifiedTableName()" which will do the allocating parse to a > List<String> for you, or whatnot > > The array was mostly for convenience's sake (our API is JSON and not > particularly performance-oriented) > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 1:40 PM David Li <lidav...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Ah, interesting… >> >> A self-recursive schema wouldn't work in Arrow's schema system, so it'd >> have to be the latter solution. Or, would it work to have a dotted name in >> the schema name column? Would parsing that back out (for applications that >> want to work with the full hierarchy) be too much trouble? >> >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022, at 13:14, Gavin Ray wrote: >> > Antoine, I can't comment on the Go code (not qualified) but to me, the >> > "verification" test >> > examples look like a mixture between JDBC and Java FlightSQL driver >> usage, >> > and seem solid. >> > >> > There was one reservation I had about the ability to handle datasource >> > namespacing that I brought up early on in the proposal discussions >> > (David responded to it but I got busy and forgot to reply again) >> > >> > If you have a datasource which provides possibly arbitrary levels of >> schema >> > namespace (something like Apache Calcite, for example) >> > How do you represent the table/schema names? >> > >> > Suppose I have a service with a DB layout like this: >> > >> > / foo >> > / bar >> > / baz >> > /qux >> > / table1 >> > - column1 >> > >> > At my dayjob, we have a technology which is very similar to >> > ADBC/FlightSQL >> > (would be great to adopt Substrait + ADBC once they're mature enough) >> > - >> > >> https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine/blob/master/dc-agents/README.md#data-connectors >> > - >> > >> https://techcrunch.com/2022/06/28/hasura-now-lets-developers-turn-any-data-source-into-a-graphql-api/ >> > >> > We wound up having to redesign the specification to handle datasources >> that >> > don't fit the "database-schema-table" or "database-table" mould >> > >> > In the ADBC schema for schema metadata, it looks like it expects a >> > single >> > "schema" struct: >> > >> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/blob/7866a566f5b7b635267bfb7a87ea49b01dfe89fa/java/core/src/main/java/org/apache/arrow/adbc/core/StandardSchemas.java#L132-L152 >> > >> > If you want to be flexible, IMO it would be good to either: >> > >> > 1. Have DB_SCHEMA_SCHEMA be self-recursive, so that schemas (with or >> > without tables) can be nested arbitrarily deep underneath each other >> > - Fully-Qualified-Table-Name (FQTN) can then be computed by walking >> > up from a table and concating the schema name until the root schema is >> > reached >> > >> > 2. Make "catalog" and "schema" go away entirely, and tables just have a >> > FQTN that is an array, a database is a collection of tables >> > - You can compute what would have been the catalog + schema >> hierarchy >> > by doing a .reduce() over the list of tables and >> > >> > Or maybe there is another, better way. But that's my $0.02 and the only >> > real concern about the API I have, without actually trying to build >> > something with it. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 5:40 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> >> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> Hello, >> >> >> >> I would urge people to review the proposed ADBC APIs, especially the Go >> >> and Java APIs which probably benefitted from less feedback than the C >> one. >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> >> Antoine. >> >> >> >> >> >> Le 21/09/2022 à 17:40, David Li a écrit : >> >> > Hello, >> >> > >> >> > We have been discussing [1] standard interfaces for Arrow-based >> database >> >> access and have been working on implementations of the proposed >> interfaces >> >> [2], all under the name "ADBC". This proposal aims to provide a unified >> >> client abstraction across Arrow-native database protocols (like Flight >> SQL) >> >> and non-Arrow database protocols, which can then be used by Arrow >> projects >> >> like Dataset/Acero and ecosystem projects like Ibis. >> >> > >> >> > For details, see the RFC here: >> >> https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/14079 >> >> > >> >> > I would like to propose that the Arrow project adopt this RFC, along >> >> with apache/arrow-adbc commit 7866a56 [3], as version 1.0.0 of the ADBC >> API >> >> standard. >> >> > >> >> > Please vote to adopt the specification as described above. (This is >> not >> >> a vote to release any components.) >> >> > >> >> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. >> >> > >> >> > [ ] +1 Adopt the ADBC specification >> >> > [ ] 0 >> >> > [ ] -1 Do not adopt the specification because... >> >> > >> >> > Thanks to the DuckDB and R DBI projects for providing feedback on and >> >> implementations of the proposal. >> >> > >> >> > [1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread/cq7t9s5p7dw4vschylhwsfgqwkr5fmf2 >> >> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc >> >> > [3]: >> >> >> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/commit/7866a566f5b7b635267bfb7a87ea49b01dfe89fa >> >> > >> >> > Thank you, >> >> > David >> >> >>
