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

fix: Update specification.md #490

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

fix: Update specification.md #490

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jacques-n
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 5, 2023

ACTION NEEDED

Substrait follows the Conventional Commits
specification
for
release automation.

The PR title and description are used as the merge commit message. Please update your PR title and description to match the specification.

@jacques-n jacques-n requested review from cpcloud and westonpace April 5, 2023 15:54
Copy link
Member

@westonpace westonpace left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks correct to me. Just one change I disagree on.

| | empty | [User Defined Relations](/relations/user_defined_relations) | Installed and reusable relational operations customized to a particular platform. |
| 4 | commit | [Relation Basics](/relations/basics) | Basic concepts around relational algebra, record emit and properties. |
| | commit | [Logical Relations](/relations/logical_relations) | Common relational operations used in compute plans including project, join, aggregation, etc. |
| | commit | [Physical Relations](/relations/physical_relations) | Specific execution sub-variations of common relational operations that describe have multiple unique physical variants associated with a single logical operation. Examples include hash join, merge join, nested loop join, etc. |
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd argue this is still WIP. We are missing some prominent physical relations from the .proto files. #455 #456 #457 #458

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It doesn't feel like we're still in the design phase which this document appears to track. #547 attempts to change the language of this page to reflect ongoing implementation.

@EpsilonPrime EpsilonPrime added the awaiting-user-input This issue is waiting on further input from users label Aug 16, 2023
@jacques-n
Copy link
Contributor Author

No progress has been made in more than six months. Closing without prejudice.

@jacques-n jacques-n closed this Aug 8, 2024
@jacques-n jacques-n deleted the clean-up-spec-status branch August 11, 2024 19:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
awaiting-user-input This issue is waiting on further input from users
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants