Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support writing Parquet _metadata and _common_metadata files #5039

Closed
rcaudy opened this issue Jan 13, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #5105
Closed

Support writing Parquet _metadata and _common_metadata files #5039

rcaudy opened this issue Jan 13, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #5105
Assignees
Labels
core Core development tasks feature request New feature or request parquet Related to the Parquet integration
Milestone

Comments

@rcaudy
Copy link
Member

rcaudy commented Jan 13, 2024

See: io.deephaven.parquet.table.layout.ParquetMetadataFileLayout
https://arrow.apache.org/docs/python/generated/pyarrow.parquet.write_metadata.html
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/36739940/parquet-difference-between-metadata-and-common-metadata

We support consuming Parquet metadata files to speed up multi-partition reading and/or support better partitioning column typing. We should add support to write these files, as well. We may choose to take inspiration from the APIs of other libraries, but it may be sufficient to simply add optional _metadata and _common_metadata path instructions the writing code in ParquetTools and below, especially the multi-table write methods.

We may also consider whether we need any additional tooling for reading and/or updating these files. It would be nice to be able to verify correctness of existing metadata files, or add metadata files to existing data sets.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core Core development tasks feature request New feature or request parquet Related to the Parquet integration
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants