Nanosecond datetime support

[Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>]

Hi everyone,

The nanosecond precision timestamp specification has been open for three
weeks, and I would like to check what people think. On the PR there seems
to be consensus <https://github.com/apache/avro/pull/2554>. Should we open
a [VOTE] or can we approve the PR? Let me know what you think.

Kind regards,
Fokko

[LAZY][VOTE] Nanosecond datetime support

[Ryan Skraba <ry...@skraba.com>]

Hey Fokko,

I've edited the subject of this mail and it's now a lazy consensus :D
This is probably the right way to go even if it looks like we have a
de facto consensus on the PR and JIRA.

We're of course welcome to continue the discussion, recap, object or
approve here on the mailing list!  And if the PR were merged and we
find dire consequences, we can revisit it (ideally before a release).

My personal opinion is that we won't find dire consequences.  We
should continue to resist adding superfluous logical types, but this
looks useful and relatively low-impact since it aligns nicely with the
mental model of other timestamps, so +1 from me.

Thanks for all the research, documentation and work you've put into this!

Ryan




On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 8:39 PM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> The nanosecond precision timestamp specification has been open for three
> weeks, and I would like to check what people think. On the PR there seems
> to be consensus <https://github.com/apache/avro/pull/2554>. Should we open
> a [VOTE] or can we approve the PR? Let me know what you think.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko