+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Sep 2, 2026 at 11:04 AM Micah Kornfield <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 (binding). > > Gang had a minor wording update which I think captures the intent of the > proposal. > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2026 at 7:25 AM Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > This is short and useful, thank you Divjot. > > > > Regards > > > > Antoine. > > > > > > Le 31/08/2026 à 19:26, Divjot Arora via dev a écrit : > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I would like to start a vote to adopt parquet-format PR 606 [1]. This > PR > > > specifies graceful handling > > > for unrecognized logical/physical type combinations: in such cases, the > > > reader should drop the logical > > > type annotation and associated stats for the column (i.e. only parse > > based > > > on the physical type). There > > > are associated Java [2] and C++ [3] reference implementations, as well > > as a > > > parquet-testing PR [4] > > > to add a such a file. > > > > > > Please vote in the next 72 hours. > > > > > > [ ] +1 Approve the proposed format change > > > [ ] +0 No opinion > > > [ ] -1 Do not approve (please provide specific reasons) > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Div > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/606 > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/pull/3711 > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/50909 > > > [4] https://github.com/apache/parquet-testing/pull/122 > > > > > > >
