Hi Jacques,

How can I tell if has that notation and is there a way for me to set the
defaults for the conversion of json datatime fields?

Regards,
 -Stefan


On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> wrote:

> There are two different settings inside a Parquet file: physical storage
> and loigcal annotation.  A timestamp should be stored as a physical INT64
> with the TIMESTAMP_MILLI annotation.  See here:
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/src/thrift/parquet.thrift#L105
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Stefán Baxter <ste...@activitystream.com>
> wrote:
>
> > thank you.
> >
> > I had seen this. I was just expecting the list to say 'TIMESTAMP_MILLI'
> :)
> > (that would up the confidence level for a newbie)
> >
> > Regards,
> >  -Stefan
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Kristine Hahn <kh...@maprtech.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Expected, I think.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://drill.apache.org/docs/parquet-format/#sql-types-to-parquet-logical-types
> > > says
> > > that the timestamp type is mapped to the Parquet TIMESTAMP_MILLI, which
> > is
> > > a Unix timestamp (int64). Take a look at
> > > https://drill.apache.org/docs/data-type-conversion/#to_timestamp and
> the
> > > Timezone Limitations section.
> > >
> > > On Monday, July 13, 2015, Stefán Baxter <ste...@activitystream.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have a json file that contains a SQL timestamp.
> > > >
> > > > When I use it to create a Parquet file it seems to become a INT64:
> > > >
> > > > Jul 12, 2015 3:34:59 PM INFO:
> parquet.hadoop.ColumnChunkPageWriteStore:
> > > > written 153,728B for [occurred_at] INT64: 28,910 values, 231,288B
> raw,
> > > > 153,681B comp, 1 pages, encodings: [RLE, BIT_PACKED, PLAIN]
> > > >
> > > > Is that to be expected or am I missing something that needs to be
> done
> > > for
> > > > it to become a timestamp in Parquet?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >  -Stefan
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Kristine Hahn
> > > Sr. Technical Writer
> > > 415-497-8107 @krishahn
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to