jhorstmann opened a new issue, #9209:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/issues/9209

   **Is your feature request related to a problem or challenge? Please describe 
what you are trying to do.**
   
   The `arrow_reader` benchmarks currently do not cover any struct arrays. This 
is an interesting gap, since there is an optimization for reading definition 
levels with a max level of 1, which would no longer be triggered when a column 
is wrapped in an optional struct. The overhead of that fallback behavior would 
be very interesting to analyze.
   
   <!--
   A clear and concise description of what the problem is. Ex. I'm always 
frustrated when [...] 
   (This section helps Arrow developers understand the context and *why* for 
this feature, in addition to  the *what*)
   -->
   
   **Describe the solution you'd like**
   
   Add some simple benchmarks for structs. A single field in that struct should 
be enough and allow comparing the time for reading a primitive column vs. that 
column wrapped in a required or optional struct. No need to cover multiple 
encodings for the leaf data, since that should not make a difference for the 
struct.
   
   <!--
   A clear and concise description of what you want to happen.
   -->
   
   **Describe alternatives you've considered**
   <!--
   A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features 
you've considered.
   -->
   
   **Additional context**
   <!--
   Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
   -->
   
   I would also be very interested in how commonly struct arrays are used in 
parquet. Most usages seem to involve only flat data, but since parquet allows 
arbitrarily complex structured data, there must be some more users of this.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to