Can some PMC members take a look at the 1.5 & 1.6 RCS?
Thanks,
Owen
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 1:00 AM Owen O'Malley wrote:
> All, Should we release the following artifacts as ORC 1.5.11?
>
> tar: http://home.apache.org/~omalley/orc-1.5.11/
> tag: https://github.com/apache/orc/releases/tag/relea
wgtmac edited a comment on pull request #543:
URL: https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/543#issuecomment-688918948
> Hey @wgtmac thanks for taking care of this.
> Would it make sense to create a separate child-ticket for the C++ fix?
[ORC-611](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ORC-611)
wgtmac commented on pull request #543:
URL: https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/543#issuecomment-688918948
> Hey @wgtmac thanks for taking care of this.
> Would it make sense to create a separate child-ticket for the C++ fix?
[ORC-611](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ORC-611) is alr
Gang Wu created ORC-663:
---
Summary: [C++] Support nanosecond in timestamp column statistics
Key: ORC-663
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ORC-663
Project: ORC
Issue Type: Sub-task
Co
pgaref commented on pull request #543:
URL: https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/543#issuecomment-688900782
Hey @wgtmac thanks for taking care of this.
Would it make sense to create a separate child-ticket for the C++ fix?
ORC-611 is already merged and could cause confusion
-
wgtmac commented on pull request #476:
URL: https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/476#issuecomment-688897503
@csringhofer @luksan47 @stiga-huang I have changed this PR to reflect the
feedback. The fix for timestamp is addressed by a separate PR:
[https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/543](https:
wgtmac opened a new pull request #543:
URL: https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/543
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
1. Store nanosecond into TimestampColumnStatistics in C++ writer.
2. Be aware of nanosecond in the TimestampColumnStatistics.
3. Adde new functions
