Re: [DISCUSS] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to GitHub
> INFRA tickets are required before migration. Perhaps this is different for existing repositories, but just a note that it may also be possible by editing .asf.yaml (e.g. [1]) [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/blob/81711045e8bb4ded1cb3b5a6fa354b35f18aa4e7/.asf.yaml#L24-L25 On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:39 PM Gang Wu wrote: > > Just want to mention that these apache/parquet-* Github repositories > have not yet enabled issues and INFRA tickets are required before > migration. > > Best, > Gang > > On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 1:55 AM Micah Kornfield > wrote: > > > SGTM +1 > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:50 AM Rok Mihevc wrote: > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:39 PM Fokko Driesprong > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hey Rok, > > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. I'm also very much in favor of Github. > > Once > > > > we've migrated cpp, I think migrating the other repositories is a great > > > > idea. Let me know if I can help! > > > > > > > > > Perfect! A question I think we want to answer is where to move which > > > issues. My mapping by component would be: > > > > > > jira/parquet-avro --> github/parquet-java > > > jira/parquet-cascading --> github/parquet-java > > > jira/parquet-cli --> github/parquet-java > > > jira/parquet-cpp--> github/arrow > > > jira/parquet-format--> github//parquet-format > > > jira/parquet-hadoop --> github//parquet-java > > > jira/parquet-mr --> github/parquet-java > > > jira/parquet-pig --> github/parquet-java > > > jira/parquet-protobuf --> github/parquet-java > > > jira/parquet-site --> github/parquet-site > > > jira/parquet-testing--> github/parquet-testing > > > jira/parquet-thrift--> github/parquet-java > > > > > > Would this be ok for everyone? > > > > > > Rok > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to GitHub
Just want to mention that these apache/parquet-* Github repositories have not yet enabled issues and INFRA tickets are required before migration. Best, Gang On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 1:55 AM Micah Kornfield wrote: > SGTM +1 > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:50 AM Rok Mihevc wrote: > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:39 PM Fokko Driesprong > wrote: > > > > > Hey Rok, > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. I'm also very much in favor of Github. > Once > > > we've migrated cpp, I think migrating the other repositories is a great > > > idea. Let me know if I can help! > > > > > > Perfect! A question I think we want to answer is where to move which > > issues. My mapping by component would be: > > > > jira/parquet-avro --> github/parquet-java > > jira/parquet-cascading --> github/parquet-java > > jira/parquet-cli --> github/parquet-java > > jira/parquet-cpp--> github/arrow > > jira/parquet-format--> github//parquet-format > > jira/parquet-hadoop --> github//parquet-java > > jira/parquet-mr --> github/parquet-java > > jira/parquet-pig --> github/parquet-java > > jira/parquet-protobuf --> github/parquet-java > > jira/parquet-site --> github/parquet-site > > jira/parquet-testing--> github/parquet-testing > > jira/parquet-thrift--> github/parquet-java > > > > Would this be ok for everyone? > > > > Rok > > >
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (binding for Arrow) In "[VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker" on Wed, 29 May 2024 16:14:44 +0200, Rok Mihevc wrote: > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > Hi all, > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote for > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's issue > tracker [3]. > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > Rok
Seattle Arrow meetup (adjacent to post::conf)
I've noticed that a number of Arrow people will be in Seattle in August. I know there are a number of Arrow contributors that live in the Seattle area as well. I'd like to organize a face-to-face meetup for the Arrow community and have created an issue for discussion[1]. I welcome any input, feedback, or interest! Note: as mentioned on the issue, no decisions will be made at the meetup, this is for community building and general discussion only and I will do my best to make everything publicly available afterwards. [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/41881
Re: [DISCUSS] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to GitHub
SGTM +1 On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:50 AM Rok Mihevc wrote: > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:39 PM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > > > Hey Rok, > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. I'm also very much in favor of Github. Once > > we've migrated cpp, I think migrating the other repositories is a great > > idea. Let me know if I can help! > > > Perfect! A question I think we want to answer is where to move which > issues. My mapping by component would be: > > jira/parquet-avro --> github/parquet-java > jira/parquet-cascading --> github/parquet-java > jira/parquet-cli --> github/parquet-java > jira/parquet-cpp--> github/arrow > jira/parquet-format--> github//parquet-format > jira/parquet-hadoop --> github//parquet-java > jira/parquet-mr --> github/parquet-java > jira/parquet-pig --> github/parquet-java > jira/parquet-protobuf --> github/parquet-java > jira/parquet-site --> github/parquet-site > jira/parquet-testing--> github/parquet-testing > jira/parquet-thrift--> github/parquet-java > > Would this be ok for everyone? > > Rok >
Re: [DISCUSS] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to GitHub
On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:39 PM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > Hey Rok, > > Thanks for bringing this up. I'm also very much in favor of Github. Once > we've migrated cpp, I think migrating the other repositories is a great > idea. Let me know if I can help! Perfect! A question I think we want to answer is where to move which issues. My mapping by component would be: jira/parquet-avro --> github/parquet-java jira/parquet-cascading --> github/parquet-java jira/parquet-cli --> github/parquet-java jira/parquet-cpp--> github/arrow jira/parquet-format--> github//parquet-format jira/parquet-hadoop --> github//parquet-java jira/parquet-mr --> github/parquet-java jira/parquet-pig --> github/parquet-java jira/parquet-protobuf --> github/parquet-java jira/parquet-site --> github/parquet-site jira/parquet-testing--> github/parquet-testing jira/parquet-thrift--> github/parquet-java Would this be ok for everyone? Rok
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (binding for Arrow and Parquet) On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 12:13 PM Raúl Cumplido wrote: > +1 (binding for Arrow) > > El mié, 29 may 2024, 18:15, Andy Grove escribió: > > > +1 (binding for Arrow). > > > > Thanks, > > > > Andy. > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9:48 AM Alenka Frim > .invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > Thank you Rok! > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:57 PM Gang Wu wrote: > > > > > > > +1 (binding for Parquet) > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Gang > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:47 PM Fokko Driesprong > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > > > Op wo 29 mei 2024 om 16:46 schreef Felipe Oliveira Carvalho < > > > > > felipe...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 11:30 Micah Kornfield < > > emkornfi...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding for Parquet, Binding for Arrow if that makes a > > > > > > difference) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 7:15 AM Rok Mihevc < > rok.mih...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a > vote > > > for > > > > > > > > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to > Arrow's > > > > issue > > > > > > > > tracker [3]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > > > > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > > > > > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > > > > > > > > [ ] +0 > > > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rok > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (binding for Arrow) El mié, 29 may 2024, 18:15, Andy Grove escribió: > +1 (binding for Arrow). > > Thanks, > > Andy. > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9:48 AM Alenka Frim .invalid> > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > Thank you Rok! > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:57 PM Gang Wu wrote: > > > > > +1 (binding for Parquet) > > > > > > Thanks! > > > Gang > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:47 PM Fokko Driesprong > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > Op wo 29 mei 2024 om 16:46 schreef Felipe Oliveira Carvalho < > > > > felipe...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 11:30 Micah Kornfield < > emkornfi...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding for Parquet, Binding for Arrow if that makes a > > > > > difference) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 7:15 AM Rok Mihevc > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote > > for > > > > > > > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's > > > issue > > > > > > > tracker [3]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > > > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > > > > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > > > > > > > [ ] +0 > > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rok > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [RESULT] Release Apache Arrow nanoarrow 0.5.0
All post-release tasks are now complete! [x] Closed GitHub milestone [x] Added release to the Apache Reporter System [x] Uploaded artifacts to Subversion [x] Created GitHub release [x] Submit R package to CRAN [x] Submit Python package to PyPI [x] Update Python package on conda-forge [x] Finish release blog post at https://github.com/apache/arrow-site/pull/525 [x] Sent announcement to annou...@apache.org [x] Removed old artifacts from SVN [x] Bumped versions on main [x] Update WrapDB entry Thanks to Will Ayd for creating the WrapDB entry for Meson build users! On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 9:57 PM Dewey Dunnington wrote: > > The vote carries with 4 binding +1s and 3 non-binding +1s. Thank you > everybody for voting! > > There are still a few post-release tasks to complete that I will take > care of this week: > > [x] Closed GitHub milestone > [x] Added release to the Apache Reporter System > [x] Uploaded artifacts to Subversion > [x] Created GitHub release > [ ] Submit R package to CRAN > [x] Submit Python package to PyPI > [ ] Update Python package on conda-forge > [ ] Finish release blog post at https://github.com/apache/arrow-site/pull/525 > [ ] Sent announcement to annou...@apache.org > [x] Removed old artifacts from SVN > [x] Bumped versions on main > > > On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 9:08 PM Dewey Dunnington > wrote: > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > I ran ./verify-release-candidate.sh 0.5.0 0 on MacOS M1. Also see a > > suite of successful verification runs from CI [1] and matrix of Python > > wheel builds [2]. > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/actions/runs/9194767396 > > [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/actions/runs/9173434897 > > > > On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 12:45 AM Vibhatha Abeykoon > > wrote: > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > I have tested on Ubuntu 22.04 > > > > > > ./verify-release-candidate.sh 0.5.0 0 > > > > > > With Regards, > > > Vibhatha Abeykoon > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 3:21 PM Raúl Cumplido wrote: > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > I've tested successfully on Ubuntu 22.04 without R. > > > > > > > > TEST_R=0 ./verify-release-candidate.sh 0.5.0 0 > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Raúl > > > > > > > > El jue, 23 may 2024 a las 6:49, David Li () > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > Tested on Debian 12 'bookworm' > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2024, at 11:03, Sutou Kouhei wrote: > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > I ran the following command line on Debian GNU/Linux sid: > > > > > > > > > > > > dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh 0.5.0 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > with: > > > > > > > > > > > > * Apache Arrow C++ main > > > > > > * gcc (Debian 13.2.0-23) 13.2.0 > > > > > > * R version 4.3.3 (2024-02-29) -- "Angel Food Cake" > > > > > > * Python 3.11.9 > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > -- > > > > > > kou > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "[VOTE] Release Apache Arrow nanoarrow 0.5.0" on Wed, 22 May 2024 > > > > > > 15:17:40 -0300, > > > > > > Dewey Dunnington wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hello, > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I would like to propose the following release candidate (rc0) of > > > > > >> Apache Arrow nanoarrow [0] version 0.5.0. This is an initial > > > > > >> release > > > > > >> consisting of 79 resolved GitHub issues from 9 contributors [1]. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> This release candidate is based on commit: > > > > > >> c5fb10035c17b598e6fd688ad9eb7b874c7c631b [2] > > > > > >> > > > > > >> The source release rc0 is hosted at [3]. > > > > > >> The changelog is located at [4]. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Please download, verify checksums and signatures, run the unit > > > > > >> tests, > > > > > >> and vote on the release. See [5] for how to validate a release > > > > > >> candidate. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Arrow nanoarrow 0.5.0 > > > > > >> [ ] +0 > > > > > >> [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Arrow nanoarrow 0.5.0 > > > > > >> because... > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [0] https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow > > > > > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/milestone/5?closed=1 > > > > > >> [2] > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/tree/apache-arrow-nanoarrow-0.5.0-rc0 > > > > > >> [3] > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/arrow/apache-arrow-nanoarrow-0.5.0-rc0/ > > > > > >> [4] > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/blob/apache-arrow-nanoarrow-0.5.0-rc0/CHANGELOG.md > > > > > >> [5] > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/blob/main/dev/release/README.md > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (binding for Arrow). Thanks, Andy. On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9:48 AM Alenka Frim wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Thank you Rok! > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:57 PM Gang Wu wrote: > > > +1 (binding for Parquet) > > > > Thanks! > > Gang > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:47 PM Fokko Driesprong > > wrote: > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > Op wo 29 mei 2024 om 16:46 schreef Felipe Oliveira Carvalho < > > > felipe...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 11:30 Micah Kornfield > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding for Parquet, Binding for Arrow if that makes a > > > > difference) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 7:15 AM Rok Mihevc > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote > for > > > > > > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's > > issue > > > > > > tracker [3]. > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > > > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > > > > > > > > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > > > > > > [ ] +0 > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rok > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (non-binding) Thank you Rok! On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:57 PM Gang Wu wrote: > +1 (binding for Parquet) > > Thanks! > Gang > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:47 PM Fokko Driesprong > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > Op wo 29 mei 2024 om 16:46 schreef Felipe Oliveira Carvalho < > > felipe...@gmail.com>: > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 11:30 Micah Kornfield > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding for Parquet, Binding for Arrow if that makes a > > > difference) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 7:15 AM Rok Mihevc > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote for > > > > > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's > issue > > > > > tracker [3]. > > > > > > > > > > [1] > https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > > > > > > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > > > > > [ ] +0 > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rok > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
[ANNOUNCE] Apache Arrow nanoarrow 0.5.0 Released
The Apache Arrow community is pleased to announce the 0.5.0 release of Apache Arrow nanoarrow. This initial release covers 79 resolved issues from 9 contributors[1]. The release is available now from [2], release notes are available at [3], and a blog post highlighting new features and breaking changes is available at [4]. What is Apache Arrow? - Apache Arrow is a columnar in-memory analytics layer designed to accelerate big data. It houses a set of canonical in-memory representations of flat and hierarchical data along with multiple language-bindings for structure manipulation. It also provides low-overhead streaming and batch messaging, zero-copy interprocess communication (IPC), and vectorized in-memory analytics libraries. Languages currently supported include C, C++, C#, Go, Java, JavaScript, Julia, MATLAB, Python, R, Ruby, and Rust. What is Apache Arrow nanoarrow? -- Apache Arrow nanoarrow is a C library for building and interpreting Arrow C Data interface structures with bindings for users of R and Python. The vision of nanoarrow is that it should be trivial for a library or application to implement an Arrow-based interface. The library provides helpers to create types, schemas, and metadata, an API for building arrays element-wise, and an API to extract elements element-wise from an array. For a more detailed description of the features nanoarrow provides and motivation for its development, see [5]. Please report any feedback to the mailing lists ([6], [7]). Regards, The Apache Arrow Community [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/issues?q=milestone%3A%22nanoarrow+0.5.0%22+is%3Aclosed [2] https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/arrow/apache-arrow-nanoarrow-0.5.0 [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow-nanoarrow/blob/apache-arrow-nanoarrow-0.5.0/CHANGELOG.md [4] https://arrow.apache.org/blog/2024/05/27/nanoarrow-0.5.0-release/ [5] https://arrow.apache.org/nanoarrow/ [6] https://lists.apache.org/list.html?u...@arrow.apache.org [7] https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@arrow.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (binding for Parquet) Thanks! Gang On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:47 PM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Op wo 29 mei 2024 om 16:46 schreef Felipe Oliveira Carvalho < > felipe...@gmail.com>: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 11:30 Micah Kornfield > > wrote: > > > > > +1 (non-binding for Parquet, Binding for Arrow if that makes a > > difference) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 7:15 AM Rok Mihevc > wrote: > > > > > > > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote for > > > > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's issue > > > > tracker [3]. > > > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > > > > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > > > > [ ] +0 > > > > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > > > > > > > > > > Rok > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (non-binding) Op wo 29 mei 2024 om 16:46 schreef Felipe Oliveira Carvalho < felipe...@gmail.com>: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 11:30 Micah Kornfield > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding for Parquet, Binding for Arrow if that makes a > difference) > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 7:15 AM Rok Mihevc wrote: > > > > > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote for > > > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's issue > > > tracker [3]. > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > > > [ ] +0 > > > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > > > > > > > Rok > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (non-binding) On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 11:30 Micah Kornfield wrote: > +1 (non-binding for Parquet, Binding for Arrow if that makes a difference) > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 7:15 AM Rok Mihevc wrote: > > > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > > > Hi all, > > > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote for > > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's issue > > tracker [3]. > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > > [ ] +0 > > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > > > > Rok > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to GitHub
Hey Rok, Thanks for bringing this up. I'm also very much in favor of Github. Once we've migrated cpp, I think migrating the other repositories is a great idea. Let me know if I can help! Kind regards, Fokko Op wo 29 mei 2024 om 16:03 schreef Rok Mihevc : > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 3:22 AM Gang Wu wrote: > > > Perhaps we can directly proceed to a vote? > > > > Since we seem to be in agreement regarding parquet-cpp I'll go ahead and > call for a vote. > > I would meanwhile propose to discuss migration of other parquet issues > (parquet-java, parquet-site, parquet-format,..) to their corresponding > github repos. > > Rok >
Re: [C++] Thread deadlock in ObjectOutputStream
Hi Antoine, Thank much for the reply! I did create an GitHub issue yesterday. #41862 On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:24 AM Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > Hi Li! > > Sorry for the delay. > It seems the problem lies here: > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/9f5899019d23b2b1eae2fedb9f6be8827885d843/cpp/src/arrow/filesystem/s3fs.cc#L1858 > > The Future is marked finished with the ObjectOutputStream's mutex taken, > and the Future's callback then triggers a chain of event which leads to > calling the ObjectOutputStream destructor, which in turn tries to take > the lock. > > Can you open a GH issue and we can follow up there? > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > Le 23/05/2024 à 21:23, Li Jin a écrit : > > Hello, > > > > I am seeing a deadlock when destructing an ObjectOutputStream. I have > > attached the stack trace. > > > > I did some debugging and found that the issue seems to be that the mutex > > in question is already held by this thread (I checked the __owner field > > in the pthread_mutex_t which points to the hanging thread) > > > > Unfortunately the stack trace doesn’t show exactly which mutex it is > > trying to lock. I wonder if someone more familiar with the IO code has > > some ideas what might be the issue and where to dig deeper? > > > > Appreciate the help, > > Li > > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (non-binding for Parquet, Binding for Arrow if that makes a difference) On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 7:15 AM Rok Mihevc wrote: > # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet > > Hi all, > > Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote for > parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's issue > tracker [3]. > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... > > > Rok >
Re: [C++] Thread deadlock in ObjectOutputStream
Hi Li! Sorry for the delay. It seems the problem lies here: https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/9f5899019d23b2b1eae2fedb9f6be8827885d843/cpp/src/arrow/filesystem/s3fs.cc#L1858 The Future is marked finished with the ObjectOutputStream's mutex taken, and the Future's callback then triggers a chain of event which leads to calling the ObjectOutputStream destructor, which in turn tries to take the lock. Can you open a GH issue and we can follow up there? Regards Antoine. Le 23/05/2024 à 21:23, Li Jin a écrit : Hello, I am seeing a deadlock when destructing an ObjectOutputStream. I have attached the stack trace. I did some debugging and found that the issue seems to be that the mutex in question is already held by this thread (I checked the __owner field in the pthread_mutex_t which points to the hanging thread) Unfortunately the stack trace doesn’t show exactly which mutex it is trying to lock. I wonder if someone more familiar with the IO code has some ideas what might be the issue and where to dig deeper? Appreciate the help, Li
Re: [VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
+1 (binding). Thanks for taking this up, Rok! Regards Antoine. Le 29/05/2024 à 16:14, Rok Mihevc a écrit : # sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet Hi all, Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote for parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's issue tracker [3]. [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues [ ] +0 [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... Rok
[VOTE] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to Arrow's issue tracker
# sending this to both dev@arrow and dev@parquet Hi all, Following the ML discussion [1] I would like to propose a vote for parquet-cpp issues to be moved from Parquet Jira [2] to Arrow's issue tracker [3]. [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s9p [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/PARQUET/issues/ [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/ The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Migrate parquet-cpp issues [ ] +0 [ ] -1 Do not migrate parquet-cpp issues because... Rok
Re: [DISCUSS] Migration of parquet-cpp issues to GitHub
On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 3:22 AM Gang Wu wrote: > Perhaps we can directly proceed to a vote? > Since we seem to be in agreement regarding parquet-cpp I'll go ahead and call for a vote. I would meanwhile propose to discuss migration of other parquet issues (parquet-java, parquet-site, parquet-format,..) to their corresponding github repos. Rok
Re: Policy on access to ursacomputing/crossbow?
Thanks for the quick reply and action Raúl. I'm also very happy to help craft such a document. I know that the need and use of being on the ursacomputing org is limited, since the comment bot generally works well, but it still would be nice to have something like that. Thank you again! -Jon On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 11:22 AM Raúl Cumplido wrote: > Hi Jon, > > From my understanding we currently don't have a written policy for > accessing the crossbow repository but PMCs should be allowed to > request access for them and/or committers. > > I had to ask what happened with your access. It seems it was a mistake > when someone was doing some cleanup on some user accesses. > > In order to avoid those things from happening in the future I will > work on a proposal to have a written policy about how to request > access and when access is removed. > > Regards, > Raúl > > El sáb, 25 may 2024 a las 2:02, Jonathan Keane () > escribió: > > > > Over my time with the project I've had access to the github repository > > ursacomputing/crossbow to be able to manually trigger crossbow jobs. I > find > > it incredibly helpful when working on the extended R CI to be able to > > iterate more quickly than waiting for the comment bot. > > > > But also over the time I've used it I've been removed and then had to ask > > to be readded to the organization at least twice now. > > > > I was recently (15 May) removed from the organization once again. One, is > > it possible to be added back to the repository? And two: what is the > policy > > around who has access and when they get removed? > > > > -Jon >
[INFO] Arrow 17.0.0 feature freeze - 1st July
Hi, In preparation for the next major Arrow release (17.0.0) I am planning on setting the 1st of July, first Monday of July, as the feature freeze date. If there are any issues that should block the release please remember to add the `Priority: blocker` label in the issue on GitHub. There are currently two issues identified as blockers [1]. If the date doesn't work for someone, please let me know by answering on this email thread. Thanks, Raúl [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow/labels/Priority%3A%20Blocker
