-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 3.9k
ARROW-8631: [C++][Python][Dataset] Add ReadOptions to CsvFileFormat, expose options to python #9725
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
25b0817
ARROW-8631: [C++][Dataset] Expose csv::ReadOptions
lidavidm ac53ac9
ARROW-8631: [Python][Dataset] Expose CsvFragmentScanOptions
lidavidm 8df714f
ARROW-8631: [C++][Dataset] Don't expose csv::ReadOptions wholesale
lidavidm 4a895a6
ARROW-8631: [R][Dataset] Expose csv format/scan options
lidavidm c2d6428
ARROW-8631: [C++][Python][R] let user specify default scan options on…
lidavidm e372f59
Update r/tests/testthat/test-dataset.R
lidavidm 40f1b83
ARROW-8631: [C++][Python][R] don't inline options structs
lidavidm File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just ScanOptions instead of FragmentScanOptions might be more descriptive? (I find the "fragment" in it a bit confusing) Because it's not that this can be set for each fragment. It's the same for all fragments for one scan.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, but we already have a ScanOptions of course ;)
Then maybe
FormatScanOptions? Since it are format-specific options?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's fair, but that does collide with ScanOptions itself, unless you mean just the naming of the builder method?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, I see…hmm, but if we had a hypothetical FlightFragment, we'd still want to have scan options specific to that fragment, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That would be "FlightScanOptios" then?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I think the slight niggle I have there is that there wouldn't be a corresponding 'Flight(File)Format'. Maybe 'PerScanOptions'? But it's not a big deal and FormatScanOptions is OK with me too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, OK, I see now that the "Fragment" in the name was meant to mean the general "fragment type", while I interpreted it as the "single fragment".
Anyway, this is more a nitpicky remark, not too important ;)