Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Wenchen Fan]

This vote passes with 4 binding +1 votes, 10 non-binding votes, one +0
vote, and no -1 votes.

Thanks all!

+1 votes (binding):
Wenchen Fan
Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier
Michael Armbrust
Reynold Xin


+1 votes (non-binding):
Xiao Li
Sameer Agarwal
Suresh Thalamati
Ryan Blue
Xingbo Jiang
Dongjoon Hyun
Zhenhua Wang
Noman Khan
vaquar khan
Hemant Bhanawat

+0 votes:
Andrew Ash

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> wrote:

> yea, join push down (providing the other reader and join conditions) and
> aggregate push down (providing grouping keys and aggregate functions) can
> be added via the current framework in the future.
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Hemant Bhanawat <hemant9...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> I have found the suggestion from Andrew Ash and James about plan push
>> down quite interesting. However, I am not clear about the join push-down
>> support at the data source level. Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the
>> join node to carry out a data source specific join? I mean join node and
>> the data source scan of the two sides can be coalesced into a single node
>> (theoretically). This can be done by providing a Strategy that replaces the
>> join node with a data source specific join node. We are doing it that way
>> for our data sources. I find this more intuitive.
>>
>> BTW, aggregate push-down support is desirable and should be considered as
>> an enhancement going forward.
>>
>> Hemant Bhanawat <https://www.linkedin.com/in/hemant-bhanawat-92a3811>
>> www.snappydata.io
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 8:45 PM, vaquar khan <vaquar.k...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Vaquar khan
>>>
>>> On Sep 10, 2017 5:18 AM, "Noman Khan" <nomanbp...@live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>> --
>>>> *From:* wangzhenhua (G) <wangzhen...@huawei.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, September 8, 2017 2:20:07 AM
>>>> *To:* Dongjoon Hyun; 蒋星博
>>>> *Cc:* Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot
>>>> Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
>>>> *Subject:* 答复: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1 (non-binding)  Great to see data source API is going to be improved!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> best regards,
>>>>
>>>> -Zhenhua(Xander)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *发件人:* Dongjoon Hyun [mailto:dongjoon.h...@gmail.com]
>>>> *发送时间:* 2017年9月8日 4:07
>>>> *收件人:* 蒋星博
>>>> *抄送:* Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot
>>>> Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
>>>> *主题:* Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1 (non-binding).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:46 PM, 蒋星博 <jiangxb1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com>于2017年9月7日 周四下午12:04写道：
>>>>
>>>> +1 as well
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust <
>>>> mich...@databricks.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
>>>> great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.
>>>>
>>>> Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
>>>> right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
>>>> other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.
>>>>
>>>> I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
>>>> you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
>>>> fixing the problems that this addresses.
>>>>
>>>> ​
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Wenchen Fan]

yea, join push down (providing the other reader and join conditions) and
aggregate push down (providing grouping keys and aggregate functions) can
be added via the current framework in the future.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Hemant Bhanawat <hemant9...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> I have found the suggestion from Andrew Ash and James about plan push down
> quite interesting. However, I am not clear about the join push-down support
> at the data source level. Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the join
> node to carry out a data source specific join? I mean join node and the
> data source scan of the two sides can be coalesced into a single node
> (theoretically). This can be done by providing a Strategy that replaces the
> join node with a data source specific join node. We are doing it that way
> for our data sources. I find this more intuitive.
>
> BTW, aggregate push-down support is desirable and should be considered as
> an enhancement going forward.
>
> Hemant Bhanawat <https://www.linkedin.com/in/hemant-bhanawat-92a3811>
> www.snappydata.io
>
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 8:45 PM, vaquar khan <vaquar.k...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vaquar khan
>>
>> On Sep 10, 2017 5:18 AM, "Noman Khan" <nomanbp...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>> --
>>> *From:* wangzhenhua (G) <wangzhen...@huawei.com>
>>> *Sent:* Friday, September 8, 2017 2:20:07 AM
>>> *To:* Dongjoon Hyun; 蒋星博
>>> *Cc:* Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot
>>> Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
>>> *Subject:* 答复: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path
>>>
>>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)  Great to see data source API is going to be improved!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> best regards,
>>>
>>> -Zhenhua(Xander)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *发件人:* Dongjoon Hyun [mailto:dongjoon.h...@gmail.com]
>>> *发送时间:* 2017年9月8日 4:07
>>> *收件人:* 蒋星博
>>> *抄送:* Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot
>>> Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
>>> *主题:* Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> +1 (non-binding).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:46 PM, 蒋星博 <jiangxb1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com>于2017年9月7日 周四下午12:04写道：
>>>
>>> +1 as well
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust <mich...@databricks.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
>>> great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.
>>>
>>> Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
>>> right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
>>> other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.
>>>
>>> I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
>>> you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
>>> fixing the problems that this addresses.
>>>
>>> ​
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier <
>>> hvanhov...@databricks.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having
>>> a generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a
>>> significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much
>>> wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the
>>> internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community
>>> to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
>>> significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
>>> prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that things
>>> might change across minor vers

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Hemant Bhanawat]

+1 (non-binding)

I have found the suggestion from Andrew Ash and James about plan push down
quite interesting. However, I am not clear about the join push-down support
at the data source level. Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the join
node to carry out a data source specific join? I mean join node and the
data source scan of the two sides can be coalesced into a single node
(theoretically). This can be done by providing a Strategy that replaces the
join node with a data source specific join node. We are doing it that way
for our data sources. I find this more intuitive.

BTW, aggregate push-down support is desirable and should be considered as
an enhancement going forward.

Hemant Bhanawat <https://www.linkedin.com/in/hemant-bhanawat-92a3811>
www.snappydata.io

On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 8:45 PM, vaquar khan <vaquar.k...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> Regards,
> Vaquar khan
>
> On Sep 10, 2017 5:18 AM, "Noman Khan" <nomanbp...@live.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>> --
>> *From:* wangzhenhua (G) <wangzhen...@huawei.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, September 8, 2017 2:20:07 AM
>> *To:* Dongjoon Hyun; 蒋星博
>> *Cc:* Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot
>> Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
>> *Subject:* 答复: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path
>>
>>
>> +1 (non-binding)  Great to see data source API is going to be improved!
>>
>>
>>
>> best regards,
>>
>> -Zhenhua(Xander)
>>
>>
>>
>> *发件人:* Dongjoon Hyun [mailto:dongjoon.h...@gmail.com]
>> *发送时间:* 2017年9月8日 4:07
>> *收件人:* 蒋星博
>> *抄送:* Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot
>> Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
>> *主题:* Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path
>>
>>
>>
>> +1 (non-binding).
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:46 PM, 蒋星博 <jiangxb1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com>于2017年9月7日 周四下午12:04写道：
>>
>> +1 as well
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust <mich...@databricks.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
>> great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.
>>
>> Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
>> right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
>> other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.
>>
>> I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
>> you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
>> fixing the problems that this addresses.
>>
>> ​
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier <
>> hvanhov...@databricks.com> wrote:
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>>
>>
>> I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having
>> a generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a
>> significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much
>> wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the
>> internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community
>> to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
>> significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
>> prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that things
>> might change across minor versions (and in some cases even maintenance
>> releases). If you are willing to go down that road, then your best bet is
>> to use the already existing spark session extensions which will allow you
>> to write such integrations and can be used as an `escape hatch`.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash <and...@andrewash.com> wrote:
>>
>> +0 (non-binding)
>>
>>
>>
>> I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal datasources
>> into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing function to
>> ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs datasources
>> developed externally as plugins to Spa

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[vaquar khan]

+1

Regards,
Vaquar khan

On Sep 10, 2017 5:18 AM, "Noman Khan" <nomanbp...@live.com> wrote:

> +1
> --
> *From:* wangzhenhua (G) <wangzhen...@huawei.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, September 8, 2017 2:20:07 AM
> *To:* Dongjoon Hyun; 蒋星博
> *Cc:* Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot
> Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
> *Subject:* 答复: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path
>
>
> +1 (non-binding)  Great to see data source API is going to be improved!
>
>
>
> best regards,
>
> -Zhenhua(Xander)
>
>
>
> *发件人:* Dongjoon Hyun [mailto:dongjoon.h...@gmail.com]
> *发送时间:* 2017年9月8日 4:07
> *收件人:* 蒋星博
> *抄送:* Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot
> Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
> *主题:* Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path
>
>
>
> +1 (non-binding).
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:46 PM, 蒋星博 <jiangxb1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
>
>
>
> Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com>于2017年9月7日 周四下午12:04写道：
>
> +1 as well
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust <mich...@databricks.com>
> wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
> great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.
>
> Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
> right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
> other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.
>
> I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
> you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
> fixing the problems that this addresses.
>
> ​
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier <
> hvanhov...@databricks.com> wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>
>
> I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having a
> generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a
> significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much
> wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the
> internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community
> to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
> significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
> prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that things
> might change across minor versions (and in some cases even maintenance
> releases). If you are willing to go down that road, then your best bet is
> to use the already existing spark session extensions which will allow you
> to write such integrations and can be used as an `escape hatch`.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash <and...@andrewash.com> wrote:
>
> +0 (non-binding)
>
>
>
> I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal datasources
> into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing function to
> ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs datasources
> developed externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark features are
> available to all datasources.
>
>
>
> But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult
> questions around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.
> James Baker (my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced
> pushdowns (combined sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that
> pushdown of aggregates and joins are desirable on longer timeframes as
> well.  The Spark community saw similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in
> SPARK-12686, join pushdown in SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown
> in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of people are interested in this kind of
> performance work for datasources.
>
>
>
> To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue experimenting
> with advanced interactions between Spark and their datasources, I'd propose
> we leave some sort of escape valve that enables these datasources to keep
> pushing the boundaries without forking Spark.  Possibly that looks like an
> additional unsupported/unstable interface that pushes down an entire
> (unstable API) logical plan, which is expected to break API on every
> release.   (Spark attempts this full-plan pushdown, and if that fails Spark
> ignores it and continu

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Noman Khan]

+1

From: wangzhenhua (G) <wangzhen...@huawei.com>
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 2:20:07 AM
To: Dongjoon Hyun; 蒋星博
Cc: Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot 
Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
Subject: 答复: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

+1 (non-binding)  Great to see data source API is going to be improved!

best regards,
-Zhenhua(Xander)

发件人: Dongjoon Hyun [mailto:dongjoon.h...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2017年9月8日 4:07
收件人: 蒋星博
抄送: Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot 
Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
主题: Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

+1 (non-binding).

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:46 PM, 蒋星博 
<jiangxb1...@gmail.com<mailto:jiangxb1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
+1


Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com<mailto:r...@databricks.com>>于2017年9月7日 
周四下午12:04写道：
+1 as well

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust 
<mich...@databricks.com<mailto:mich...@databricks.com>> wrote:
+1

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue 
<rb...@netflix.com.invalid<mailto:rb...@netflix.com.invalid>> wrote:

+1 (non-binding)

Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be great to 
see the doc updated before it is finally published though.

Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics right 
for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with other 
private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.

I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support you’re 
talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block fixing the 
problems that this addresses.
​

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier 
<hvanhov...@databricks.com<mailto:hvanhov...@databricks.com>> wrote:
+1 (binding)

I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having a 
generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a 
significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much 
wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the internal 
catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community to maintain 
and has the potential to slow development velocity significantly. If you want 
to write such integrations then you should be prepared to work with catalyst 
internals and own up to the fact that things might change across minor versions 
(and in some cases even maintenance releases). If you are willing to go down 
that road, then your best bet is to use the already existing spark session 
extensions which will allow you to write such integrations and can be used as 
an `escape hatch`.


On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash 
<and...@andrewash.com<mailto:and...@andrewash.com>> wrote:
+0 (non-binding)

I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal datasources into 
a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing function to ensure 
that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs datasources developed 
externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark features are available to 
all datasources.

But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult questions 
around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.  James Baker 
(my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced pushdowns (combined 
sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that pushdown of aggregates and 
joins are desirable on longer timeframes as well.  The Spark community saw 
similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in SPARK-12686, join pushdown in 
SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of 
people are interested in this kind of performance work for datasources.

To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue experimenting with 
advanced interactions between Spark and their datasources, I'd propose we leave 
some sort of escape valve that enables these datasources to keep pushing the 
boundaries without forking Spark.  Possibly that looks like an additional 
unsupported/unstable interface that pushes down an entire (unstable API) 
logical plan, which is expected to break API on every release.   (Spark 
attempts this full-plan pushdown, and if that fails Spark ignores it and 
continues on with the rest of the V2 API for compatibility).  Or maybe it looks 
like something else that we don't know of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of 
the desired goals for the V2 API and instead should be a separate SPIP.

If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced datasource 
developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like this SPIP is 
focused more on getting the basics right for what many datasources are already 
doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs, vs p

答复: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[wangzhenhua (G)]

+1 (non-binding)  Great to see data source API is going to be improved!

best regards,
-Zhenhua(Xander)

发件人: Dongjoon Hyun [mailto:dongjoon.h...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2017年9月8日 4:07
收件人: 蒋星博
抄送: Michael Armbrust; Reynold Xin; Andrew Ash; Herman van Hövell tot 
Westerflier; Ryan Blue; Spark dev list; Suresh Thalamati; Wenchen Fan
主题: Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

+1 (non-binding).

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:46 PM, 蒋星博 
<jiangxb1...@gmail.com<mailto:jiangxb1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
+1


Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com<mailto:r...@databricks.com>>于2017年9月7日 
周四下午12:04写道：
+1 as well

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust 
<mich...@databricks.com<mailto:mich...@databricks.com>> wrote:
+1

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue 
<rb...@netflix.com.invalid<mailto:rb...@netflix.com.invalid>> wrote:

+1 (non-binding)

Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be great to 
see the doc updated before it is finally published though.

Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics right 
for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with other 
private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.

I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support you’re 
talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block fixing the 
problems that this addresses.
​

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier 
<hvanhov...@databricks.com<mailto:hvanhov...@databricks.com>> wrote:
+1 (binding)

I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having a 
generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a 
significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much 
wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the internal 
catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community to maintain 
and has the potential to slow development velocity significantly. If you want 
to write such integrations then you should be prepared to work with catalyst 
internals and own up to the fact that things might change across minor versions 
(and in some cases even maintenance releases). If you are willing to go down 
that road, then your best bet is to use the already existing spark session 
extensions which will allow you to write such integrations and can be used as 
an `escape hatch`.


On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash 
<and...@andrewash.com<mailto:and...@andrewash.com>> wrote:
+0 (non-binding)

I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal datasources into 
a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing function to ensure 
that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs datasources developed 
externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark features are available to 
all datasources.

But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult questions 
around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.  James Baker 
(my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced pushdowns (combined 
sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that pushdown of aggregates and 
joins are desirable on longer timeframes as well.  The Spark community saw 
similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in SPARK-12686, join pushdown in 
SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of 
people are interested in this kind of performance work for datasources.

To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue experimenting with 
advanced interactions between Spark and their datasources, I'd propose we leave 
some sort of escape valve that enables these datasources to keep pushing the 
boundaries without forking Spark.  Possibly that looks like an additional 
unsupported/unstable interface that pushes down an entire (unstable API) 
logical plan, which is expected to break API on every release.   (Spark 
attempts this full-plan pushdown, and if that fails Spark ignores it and 
continues on with the rest of the V2 API for compatibility).  Or maybe it looks 
like something else that we don't know of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of 
the desired goals for the V2 API and instead should be a separate SPIP.

If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced datasource 
developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like this SPIP is 
focused more on getting the basics right for what many datasources are already 
doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of 
the art for performance.

Andrew

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Suresh Thalamati 
<suresh.thalam...@gmail.com<mailto:suresh.thalam...@gmail.com>> wrote:
+1 (non-binding)


On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan 
<cloud0...@gmail.com<mailto:cloud0...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi all,

In the previous discussi

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Dongjoon Hyun]

+1 (non-binding).

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:46 PM, 蒋星博  wrote:

> +1
>
>
> Reynold Xin 于2017年9月7日 周四下午12:04写道：
>
>> +1 as well
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 +1 (non-binding)

 Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
 great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.

 Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
 right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
 other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.

 I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
 you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
 fixing the problems that this addresses.
 ​

 On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier <
 hvanhov...@databricks.com> wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between
> having a generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing
> down a significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later
> has much wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of
> the internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the
> community to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
> significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
> prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that 
> things
> might change across minor versions (and in some cases even maintenance
> releases). If you are willing to go down that road, then your best bet is
> to use the already existing spark session extensions which will allow you
> to write such integrations and can be used as an `escape hatch`.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash 
> wrote:
>
>> +0 (non-binding)
>>
>> I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal
>> datasources into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a 
>> forcing
>> function to ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs
>> datasources developed externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark
>> features are available to all datasources.
>>
>> But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult
>> questions around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.
>> James Baker (my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced
>> pushdowns (combined sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that
>> pushdown of aggregates and joins are desirable on longer timeframes as
>> well.  The Spark community saw similar requests, for aggregate pushdown 
>> in
>> SPARK-12686, join pushdown in SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown
>> in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of people are interested in this kind 
>> of
>> performance work for datasources.
>>
>> To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue
>> experimenting with advanced interactions between Spark and their
>> datasources, I'd propose we leave some sort of escape valve that enables
>> these datasources to keep pushing the boundaries without forking Spark.
>> Possibly that looks like an additional unsupported/unstable interface 
>> that
>> pushes down an entire (unstable API) logical plan, which is expected to
>> break API on every release.   (Spark attempts this full-plan pushdown, 
>> and
>> if that fails Spark ignores it and continues on with the rest of the V2 
>> API
>> for compatibility).  Or maybe it looks like something else that we don't
>> know of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of the desired goals for the V2
>> API and instead should be a separate SPIP.
>>
>> If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced
>> datasource developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like
>> this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics right for what many
>> datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs,
>> vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Suresh Thalamati <
>> suresh.thalam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write
>>> path of data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call 
>>> a
>>> vote for Data Source V2 

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[蒋星博]

+1


Reynold Xin 于2017年9月7日 周四下午12:04写道：

> +1 as well
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust 
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
>>> great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.
>>>
>>> Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
>>> right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
>>> other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.
>>>
>>> I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
>>> you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
>>> fixing the problems that this addresses.
>>> ​
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier <
>>> hvanhov...@databricks.com> wrote:
>>>
 +1 (binding)

 I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between
 having a generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing
 down a significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later
 has much wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of
 the internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the
 community to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
 significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
 prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that things
 might change across minor versions (and in some cases even maintenance
 releases). If you are willing to go down that road, then your best bet is
 to use the already existing spark session extensions which will allow you
 to write such integrations and can be used as an `escape hatch`.


 On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash 
 wrote:

> +0 (non-binding)
>
> I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal
> datasources into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing
> function to ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs
> datasources developed externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark
> features are available to all datasources.
>
> But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult
> questions around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.
> James Baker (my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced
> pushdowns (combined sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that
> pushdown of aggregates and joins are desirable on longer timeframes as
> well.  The Spark community saw similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in
> SPARK-12686, join pushdown in SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown
> in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of people are interested in this kind of
> performance work for datasources.
>
> To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue
> experimenting with advanced interactions between Spark and their
> datasources, I'd propose we leave some sort of escape valve that enables
> these datasources to keep pushing the boundaries without forking Spark.
> Possibly that looks like an additional unsupported/unstable interface that
> pushes down an entire (unstable API) logical plan, which is expected to
> break API on every release.   (Spark attempts this full-plan pushdown, and
> if that fails Spark ignores it and continues on with the rest of the V2 
> API
> for compatibility).  Or maybe it looks like something else that we don't
> know of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of the desired goals for the V2
> API and instead should be a separate SPIP.
>
> If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced datasource
> developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like this SPIP is
> focused more on getting the basics right for what many datasources are
> already doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs, vs pushing
> forward state of the art for performance.
>
> Andrew
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Suresh Thalamati <
> suresh.thalam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>>
>> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write
>> path of data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a
>> vote for Data Source V2 read path only.
>>
>> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ-Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>>
>> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic 

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Reynold Xin]

+1 as well

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Michael Armbrust 
wrote:

> +1
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
>> great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.
>>
>> Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
>> right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
>> other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.
>>
>> I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
>> you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
>> fixing the problems that this addresses.
>> ​
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier <
>> hvanhov...@databricks.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having
>>> a generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a
>>> significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much
>>> wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the
>>> internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community
>>> to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
>>> significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
>>> prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that things
>>> might change across minor versions (and in some cases even maintenance
>>> releases). If you are willing to go down that road, then your best bet is
>>> to use the already existing spark session extensions which will allow you
>>> to write such integrations and can be used as an `escape hatch`.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 +0 (non-binding)

 I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal
 datasources into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing
 function to ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs
 datasources developed externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark
 features are available to all datasources.

 But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult
 questions around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.
 James Baker (my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced
 pushdowns (combined sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that
 pushdown of aggregates and joins are desirable on longer timeframes as
 well.  The Spark community saw similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in
 SPARK-12686, join pushdown in SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown
 in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of people are interested in this kind of
 performance work for datasources.

 To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue
 experimenting with advanced interactions between Spark and their
 datasources, I'd propose we leave some sort of escape valve that enables
 these datasources to keep pushing the boundaries without forking Spark.
 Possibly that looks like an additional unsupported/unstable interface that
 pushes down an entire (unstable API) logical plan, which is expected to
 break API on every release.   (Spark attempts this full-plan pushdown, and
 if that fails Spark ignores it and continues on with the rest of the V2 API
 for compatibility).  Or maybe it looks like something else that we don't
 know of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of the desired goals for the V2
 API and instead should be a separate SPIP.

 If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced datasource
 developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like this SPIP is
 focused more on getting the basics right for what many datasources are
 already doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs, vs pushing
 forward state of the art for performance.

 Andrew

 On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Suresh Thalamati <
 suresh.thalam...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
>
> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write
> path of data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a
> vote for Data Source V2 read path only.
>
> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ
> -Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>
> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for
> the read path is:
> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136
>
> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:
>

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Michael Armbrust]

+1

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Ryan Blue  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
> great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.
>
> Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
> right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
> other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.
>
> I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
> you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
> fixing the problems that this addresses.
> ​
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier <
> hvanhov...@databricks.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having
>> a generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a
>> significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much
>> wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the
>> internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community
>> to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
>> significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
>> prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that things
>> might change across minor versions (and in some cases even maintenance
>> releases). If you are willing to go down that road, then your best bet is
>> to use the already existing spark session extensions which will allow you
>> to write such integrations and can be used as an `escape hatch`.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash  wrote:
>>
>>> +0 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal
>>> datasources into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing
>>> function to ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs
>>> datasources developed externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark
>>> features are available to all datasources.
>>>
>>> But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult
>>> questions around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.
>>> James Baker (my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced
>>> pushdowns (combined sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that
>>> pushdown of aggregates and joins are desirable on longer timeframes as
>>> well.  The Spark community saw similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in
>>> SPARK-12686, join pushdown in SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown
>>> in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of people are interested in this kind of
>>> performance work for datasources.
>>>
>>> To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue
>>> experimenting with advanced interactions between Spark and their
>>> datasources, I'd propose we leave some sort of escape valve that enables
>>> these datasources to keep pushing the boundaries without forking Spark.
>>> Possibly that looks like an additional unsupported/unstable interface that
>>> pushes down an entire (unstable API) logical plan, which is expected to
>>> break API on every release.   (Spark attempts this full-plan pushdown, and
>>> if that fails Spark ignores it and continues on with the rest of the V2 API
>>> for compatibility).  Or maybe it looks like something else that we don't
>>> know of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of the desired goals for the V2
>>> API and instead should be a separate SPIP.
>>>
>>> If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced datasource
>>> developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like this SPIP is
>>> focused more on getting the basics right for what many datasources are
>>> already doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs, vs pushing
>>> forward state of the art for performance.
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Suresh Thalamati <
>>> suresh.thalam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 +1 (non-binding)


 On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:

 Hi all,

 In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write path
 of data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a vote
 for Data Source V2 read path only.

 The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ
 -Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit

 The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for
 the read path is:
 https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136

 The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:

 +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP.
 +0: Don't really care.
 -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following
 technical reasons.

 Thanks!

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Ryan Blue]

+1 (non-binding)

Thanks for making the updates reflected in the current PR. It would be
great to see the doc updated before it is finally published though.

Right now it feels like this SPIP is focused more on getting the basics
right for what many datasources are already doing in API V1 combined with
other private APIs, vs pushing forward state of the art for performance.

I think that’s the right approach for this SPIP. We can add the support
you’re talking about later with a more specific plan that doesn’t block
fixing the problems that this addresses.
​

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier <
hvanhov...@databricks.com> wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having a
> generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a
> significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much
> wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the
> internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community
> to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
> significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
> prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that things
> might change across minor versions (and in some cases even maintenance
> releases). If you are willing to go down that road, then your best bet is
> to use the already existing spark session extensions which will allow you
> to write such integrations and can be used as an `escape hatch`.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash  wrote:
>
>> +0 (non-binding)
>>
>> I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal datasources
>> into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing function to
>> ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs datasources
>> developed externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark features are
>> available to all datasources.
>>
>> But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult
>> questions around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.
>> James Baker (my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced
>> pushdowns (combined sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that
>> pushdown of aggregates and joins are desirable on longer timeframes as
>> well.  The Spark community saw similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in
>> SPARK-12686, join pushdown in SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown
>> in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of people are interested in this kind of
>> performance work for datasources.
>>
>> To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue experimenting
>> with advanced interactions between Spark and their datasources, I'd propose
>> we leave some sort of escape valve that enables these datasources to keep
>> pushing the boundaries without forking Spark.  Possibly that looks like an
>> additional unsupported/unstable interface that pushes down an entire
>> (unstable API) logical plan, which is expected to break API on every
>> release.   (Spark attempts this full-plan pushdown, and if that fails Spark
>> ignores it and continues on with the rest of the V2 API for
>> compatibility).  Or maybe it looks like something else that we don't know
>> of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of the desired goals for the V2 API
>> and instead should be a separate SPIP.
>>
>> If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced datasource
>> developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like this SPIP is
>> focused more on getting the basics right for what many datasources are
>> already doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs, vs pushing
>> forward state of the art for performance.
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Suresh Thalamati <
>> suresh.thalam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write path
>>> of data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a vote
>>> for Data Source V2 read path only.
>>>
>>> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ
>>> -Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>>>
>>> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for the
>>> read path is:
>>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136
>>>
>>> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:
>>>
>>> +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP.
>>> +0: Don't really care.
>>> -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following technical
>>> reasons.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Herman van Hövell
>
> Software Engineer
>
> Databricks Inc.
>
> hvanhov...@databricks.com
>
> +31 6 420 590 27
>
> databricks.com
>
> [image: http://databricks.com] 

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Herman van Hövell tot Westerflier]

+1 (binding)

I personally believe that there is quite a big difference between having a
generic data source interface with a low surface area and pushing down a
significant part of query processing into a datasource. The later has much
wider wider surface area and will require us to stabilize most of the
internal catalyst API's which will be a significant burden on the community
to maintain and has the potential to slow development velocity
significantly. If you want to write such integrations then you should be
prepared to work with catalyst internals and own up to the fact that things
might change across minor versions (and in some cases even maintenance
releases). If you are willing to go down that road, then your best bet is
to use the already existing spark session extensions which will allow you
to write such integrations and can be used as an `escape hatch`.


On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ash  wrote:

> +0 (non-binding)
>
> I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal datasources
> into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing function to
> ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs datasources
> developed externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark features are
> available to all datasources.
>
> But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult
> questions around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.
> James Baker (my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced
> pushdowns (combined sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that
> pushdown of aggregates and joins are desirable on longer timeframes as
> well.  The Spark community saw similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in
> SPARK-12686, join pushdown in SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown
> in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of people are interested in this kind of
> performance work for datasources.
>
> To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue experimenting
> with advanced interactions between Spark and their datasources, I'd propose
> we leave some sort of escape valve that enables these datasources to keep
> pushing the boundaries without forking Spark.  Possibly that looks like an
> additional unsupported/unstable interface that pushes down an entire
> (unstable API) logical plan, which is expected to break API on every
> release.   (Spark attempts this full-plan pushdown, and if that fails Spark
> ignores it and continues on with the rest of the V2 API for
> compatibility).  Or maybe it looks like something else that we don't know
> of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of the desired goals for the V2 API
> and instead should be a separate SPIP.
>
> If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced datasource
> developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like this SPIP is
> focused more on getting the basics right for what many datasources are
> already doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs, vs pushing
> forward state of the art for performance.
>
> Andrew
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Suresh Thalamati <
> suresh.thalam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>>
>> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write path
>> of data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a vote
>> for Data Source V2 read path only.
>>
>> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ
>> -Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>>
>> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for the
>> read path is:
>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136
>>
>> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:
>>
>> +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP.
>> +0: Don't really care.
>> -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following technical
>> reasons.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 

Herman van Hövell

Software Engineer

Databricks Inc.

hvanhov...@databricks.com

+31 6 420 590 27

databricks.com

[image: http://databricks.com] 



[image: Announcing Databricks Serverless. The first serverless data science
and big data platform. Watch the demo from Spark Summit 2017.]

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Andrew Ash]

+0 (non-binding)

I think there are benefits to unifying all the Spark-internal datasources
into a common public API for sure.  It will serve as a forcing function to
ensure that those internal datasources aren't advantaged vs datasources
developed externally as plugins to Spark, and that all Spark features are
available to all datasources.

But I also think this read-path proposal avoids the more difficult
questions around how to continue pushing datasource performance forwards.
James Baker (my colleague) had a number of questions about advanced
pushdowns (combined sorting and filtering), and Reynold also noted that
pushdown of aggregates and joins are desirable on longer timeframes as
well.  The Spark community saw similar requests, for aggregate pushdown in
SPARK-12686, join pushdown in SPARK-20259, and arbitrary plan pushdown
in SPARK-12449.  Clearly a number of people are interested in this kind of
performance work for datasources.

To leave enough space for datasource developers to continue experimenting
with advanced interactions between Spark and their datasources, I'd propose
we leave some sort of escape valve that enables these datasources to keep
pushing the boundaries without forking Spark.  Possibly that looks like an
additional unsupported/unstable interface that pushes down an entire
(unstable API) logical plan, which is expected to break API on every
release.   (Spark attempts this full-plan pushdown, and if that fails Spark
ignores it and continues on with the rest of the V2 API for
compatibility).  Or maybe it looks like something else that we don't know
of yet.  Possibly this falls outside of the desired goals for the V2 API
and instead should be a separate SPIP.

If we had a plan for this kind of escape valve for advanced datasource
developers I'd be an unequivocal +1.  Right now it feels like this SPIP is
focused more on getting the basics right for what many datasources are
already doing in API V1 combined with other private APIs, vs pushing
forward state of the art for performance.

Andrew

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Suresh Thalamati <
suresh.thalam...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
>
> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write path of
> data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a vote for
> Data Source V2 read path only.
>
> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ-
> Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>
> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for the
> read path is:
> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136
>
> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:
>
> +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP.
> +0: Don't really care.
> -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following technical
> reasons.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Suresh Thalamati]

+1 (non-binding)


> On Sep 6, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write path of 
> data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a vote for 
> Data Source V2 read path only.
> 
> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ-Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>  
> 
> 
> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for the read 
> path is:
> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136 
> 
> 
> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:
> 
> +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP.
> +0: Don't really care.
> -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following technical 
> reasons.
> 
> Thanks!

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Sameer Agarwal]

+1

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Xiao Li  wrote:

> +1
>
> Xiao
>
> 2017-09-06 19:37 GMT-07:00 Wenchen Fan :
>
>> adding my own +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write path
>>> of data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a vote
>>> for Data Source V2 read path only.
>>>
>>> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ
>>> -Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>>>
>>> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for the
>>> read path is:
>>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136
>>>
>>> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:
>>>
>>> +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP.
>>> +0: Don't really care.
>>> -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following technical
>>> reasons.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Sameer Agarwal
Software Engineer | Databricks Inc.
http://cs.berkeley.edu/~sameerag

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Xiao Li]

+1

Xiao

2017-09-06 19:37 GMT-07:00 Wenchen Fan :

> adding my own +1 (binding)
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write path
>> of data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a vote
>> for Data Source V2 read path only.
>>
>> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ
>> -Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>>
>> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for the
>> read path is:
>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136
>>
>> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:
>>
>> +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP.
>> +0: Don't really care.
>> -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following technical
>> reasons.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] [SPIP] SPARK-15689: Data Source API V2 read path

[Wenchen Fan]

adding my own +1 (binding)

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Wenchen Fan  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> In the previous discussion, we decided to split the read and write path of
> data source v2 into 2 SPIPs, and I'm sending this email to call a vote for
> Data Source V2 read path only.
>
> The full document of the Data Source API V2 is:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n_vUVbF4KD3gxTmkNEon5qdQ-
> Z8qU5Frf6WMQZ6jJVM/edit
>
> The ready-for-review PR that implements the basic infrastructure for the
> read path is:
> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19136
>
> The vote will be up for the next 72 hours. Please reply with your vote:
>
> +1: Yeah, let's go forward and implement the SPIP.
> +0: Don't really care.
> -1: I don't think this is a good idea because of the following technical
> reasons.
>
> Thanks!
>