Skip to content

MINOR: [Docs] Add Timestamp With Offset to canonical extension types status#50309

Merged
rok merged 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
esadek:status-doc
Jul 1, 2026
Merged

MINOR: [Docs] Add Timestamp With Offset to canonical extension types status#50309
rok merged 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
esadek:status-doc

Conversation

@esadek

@esadek esadek commented Jun 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Rationale for this change

The Timestamp With Offset canonical extension type is missing from the Implementation Status documentation page.

What changes are included in this PR?

This PR adds a row for Timestamp With Offset to the Canonical Extension types table of the Implementation Status documentation page. It shows that the extension type is implemented only in Rust: apache/arrow-rs#8743.

Are these changes tested?

Screenshot from docs running locally:

SCR-20260630-npnr

Are there any user-facing changes?

This is a documentation change.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Thanks for opening a pull request!

If this is not a minor PR. Could you open an issue for this pull request on GitHub? https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/new/choose

Opening GitHub issues ahead of time contributes to the Openness of the Apache Arrow project.

Then could you also rename the pull request title in the following format?

GH-${GITHUB_ISSUE_ID}: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

or

MINOR: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

See also:

@esadek esadek changed the title docs: add Timestamp With Offset to canonical extension types status MINOR: [Docs] Add Timestamp With Offset to canonical extension types status Jun 30, 2026
@esadek

esadek commented Jun 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

cc @zeroshade

@rok rok left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This checks out!
Wanna implement this in C++/Python @esadek? :)

@github-actions github-actions Bot added awaiting merge Awaiting merge and removed awaiting review Awaiting review labels Jul 1, 2026
@rok rok merged commit e183ea9 into apache:main Jul 1, 2026
32 checks passed
@rok rok removed the awaiting merge Awaiting merge label Jul 1, 2026
@esadek esadek deleted the status-doc branch July 1, 2026 21:10
@esadek

esadek commented Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@rok I could give Python a stab once it's been implemented in C++. Haven't written a line of C++ before.

@rok

rok commented Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@rok I could give Python a stab once it's been implemented in C++. Haven't written a line of C++ before.

Good time to give it a try then! :))
See some examples: #43488, #13901

@conbench-apache-arrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 3 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit e183ea9.

There was 1 benchmark result indicating a performance regression:

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 2 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants