emkornfield commented on PR #584:
URL: https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/584#issuecomment-4672776075

   > > What is the point of this? If both readers and writers are new, why not 
using INT64-typed timestamps instead? INT96 are marked as deprecated for years.
   
   > @wgtmac This is a fair point, but some large engines like Spark still 
default to writing INT96 timestamps and not having a way to signal that stats 
are definitively correct is useful there. I'm also following up with Spark 
folks to see how we can make progress and move towards INT64 timestamps by 
default, but in the short term I still feel this change is targeted and useful.
   
   There is also no current alternative for nano timestamps that need to span 
the SQL time RAnge (years 0001-9999)


-- 
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]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to