[jira] [Comment Edited] (ARROW-5501) [R] read/write_feather/arrow?

["Wes McKinney (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-5501?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16855181#comment-16855181 ] 

Wes McKinney edited comment on ARROW-5501 at 6/4/19 12:50 AM:
--------------------------------------------------------------

Can you open a JIRA issue about FeatherV2 (or maybe this is the issue)? I would like to retain the file format name as a "simple memory-mappable Arrow-based file format" and handle backwards compatibility for old files for some period of time


was (Author: wesmckinn):
Can you open a JIRA issue about FeatherV2? I would like to retain the file format name as a "simple memory-mappable Arrow-based file format" and handle backwards compatibility for old files for some period of time

> [R] read/write_feather/arrow?
> -----------------------------
>
>                 Key: ARROW-5501
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-5501
>             Project: Apache Arrow
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: R
>            Reporter: Neal Richardson
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 0.14.0
>
>
> read_feather and write_feather exist, and there is also write_arrow. But no read_arrow.
> Some questions (which go beyond just R): There's talk of a "feather 2.0", i.e. "just" serializing the IPC format (which IIUC is what write_arrow does). Are we going to continue to call the file format "Feather", and possibly continue supporting the "feather 1.0" format as a subset/special case? Or will "feather" mean this limited format and "arrow" be the name of the full-featured file?
> In terms of this issue, should write_arrow be folded into write_feather and there be an argument for indicating which version to write? Or should the distinction be maintained, and we need to add a read_arrow() function?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)