feat!: Parquet compression#1960
Conversation
…a-kernel-rs into fix_id_writing
…a-kernel-rs into fix_id_writing
Co-authored-by: Fokko Driesprong <[email protected]>
…a-kernel-rs into fix_id_writing
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1960 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 88.49% 88.48% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 179 179
Lines 59008 59100 +92
Branches 59008 59100 +92
==========================================
+ Hits 52220 52296 +76
- Misses 4786 4800 +14
- Partials 2002 2004 +2 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
scovich
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The approach looks reasonable, but I think there was a bad merge that reinstated deleted code?
| #[rstest] | ||
| #[case("snappy", ParquetCompression::Snappy)] | ||
| #[case("SNAPPY", ParquetCompression::Snappy)] | ||
| #[case("zstd", ParquetCompression::Zstd)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
needed?
| #[rstest] | |
| #[case("snappy", ParquetCompression::Snappy)] | |
| #[case("SNAPPY", ParquetCompression::Snappy)] | |
| #[case("zstd", ParquetCompression::Zstd)] | |
| #[rstest] | |
| #[case("snappy", ParquetCompression::Snappy)] | |
| #[case("Snappy", ParquetCompression::Snappy)] | |
| #[case("SNAPPY", ParquetCompression::Snappy)] | |
| #[case("zstd", ParquetCompression::Zstd)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added additional test cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These FFI test fixes seem unrelated?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, should be fixed.
| #[strum(ascii_case_insensitive)] | ||
| pub enum ParquetCompression { | ||
| /// Snappy compression (default). | ||
| #[default] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How do we decide when zstd is default (above) vs. snappy (here)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
unified to zstd, it is what we merged into the RFC.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Bad merge? I thought we reverted PathMode?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, should be fixed.
What changes are proposed in this pull request?
Open question if the Configuration definition should be moved to TableProperties
How was this change tested?
Added unit tests