[jira] [Comment Edited] (ARROW-15820) [C++][Doc] Add table_source to streaming_execution.rst & clarify parameter name

["Vibhatha Lakmal Abeykoon (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-15820?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17500519#comment-17500519 ] 

Vibhatha Lakmal Abeykoon edited comment on ARROW-15820 at 3/3/22, 6:12 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[~westonpace] adding some thoughts to this, I already have reported an issue to enhance the existing exec-plan examples with the new additions, TableSource and TableSink. I can work on that PR just after this most probably(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-15515). But I am holding that there are some issues that we may need to solve before that (i.e: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-15297, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-15261, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-15263). 


was (Author: vibhatha):
[~westonpace] adding some thoughts to this, I already have reported an issue to enhance the existing exec-plan examples with the new additions, TableSource and TableSink. I can work on that PR just after this most probably([C++] Update ExecPlan example code and documentation with new options). But I am holding that there are some issues that we may need to solve before that (i.e: [C++] Simplify creating a scan node, [C++] The write node options shouldn't require a schema). 

> [C++][Doc] Add table_source to streaming_execution.rst & clarify parameter name
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ARROW-15820
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-15820
>             Project: Apache Arrow
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: C++
>            Reporter: Weston Pace
>            Assignee: Vibhatha Lakmal Abeykoon
>            Priority: Major
>
> Currently the table_source node does not appear in our documentation.
> Also, in {{TableSourceNodeOptions}} we have:
> {noformat}
>   // Size of batches to emit from this node
>   // If the table is larger the node will emit multiple batches from the
>   // the table to be processed in parallel.
>   int64_t batch_size;
> {noformat}
> However, when looking into a performance issue today, I realized this description is incomplete.  In reality we should probably call this parameter {{max_batch_size}}.
> Furthermore, we should make it clear that a table with smaller batches will emit smaller batches directly (this is a good thing in my case) and will not concatenate small batches together into a larger batch.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)