Repository navigation
Spec: Clarify that readers must accept promotable types in any data file - #18404
Open
gsandeep1241 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
gsandeep1241 wants to merge 1 commit into
gsandeep1241 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
…a files Readers should accept data file columns whose type is promotable to the field's current type, not just an exact match. This handles the case where a file was written before a type promotion occurred.
gsandeep1241
marked this pull request as ready for review
October 7, 2026 01:10
This branch has not been deployed
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Type promotion lets a field evolve, for example from DECIMAL(8. 0) to DECIMAL(25. 0)without rewriting data files. Existing Parquet files keep storing the column as int32 with DECIMAL(8. 0) and readers must read them as DECIMAL(25, 0).
The spec addresses reading narrower types in the context of schema evolution. However, schema evolution can potentially leave no markers in the metadata and so readers must be prepared to read narrower types than the type specified in the schema.
(Discussion open on mail thread)