Ya, it sounds like a good plan to materialize them.
Thank you for driving this, Gang.

Dongjoon.

On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:52 PM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote:

> No, I don't have any timeline yet. My intention is to find if anyone
> is interested in working on any part or proposing any new feature.
> The items I listed above can be the starting point to discuss. It would
> be good to collect enough information here on the ML and then make
> a list on a Github issue to sort things out.
>
> Best,
> Gang
>
> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 1:45 PM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon.h...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for the heads up. As a part of discussion, do you have any
> > timeline or target ORC version for orc-format v2.0?
> > Given that it's one of the non-trivial efforts, I'm wondering what we can
> > achieve in 2024.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dongjoon.
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:00 PM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The Apache ORC community has created a separate orc-format
> > > repo [1] to hold format specs. It can help us decouple the versions
> > > of format and implementation.
> > >
> > > IMO, it is now a good time to discuss the next step to evolve the
> > > ORC format. To give my two cents, following items are what we can do:
> > > - Follow up with the ORC Format v2 proposal [2]
> > > - Parquet feature parity [3]
> > > - Lance feature parity [4]
> > >
> > > Considering the activity in the community, I'd like to hear different
> > > opinions before taking any action. Any suggestions are welcome.
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/orc-format
> > > [2] https://orc.apache.org/specification/ORCv2
> > > [3] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format
> > > [4] https://lancedb.github.io/lance/format.html
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Gang
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to