What is the problem the feature request solves?
The ParquetFilters were added originally so we could shade Parquet in Comet. However the shading was removed later as it caused a lot of trouble on the Iceberg side. In addition, we ported several Parquet classes from parquet-mr into Comet, so now the boundary between Comet and parquet-mr is fairly thin. Therefore, we could consider removing ParquetFilters and directly use the one from Spark.
The advantage of this is we are able to absorb changes & improvements in the newer version of Spark. For instance, apache/spark#36696 added Parquet In/NotIn pushdown from Spark side, which is only available since Spark 3.4. At the moment, as Comet keeps a copy of Spark's ParquetFilters, the feature is not added in order to be backward compatible with Spark 3.2 and 3.3.
Describe the potential solution
Evaluate whether we can remove ParquetFilters from Comet.
Additional context
No response
What is the problem the feature request solves?
The
ParquetFilterswere added originally so we could shade Parquet in Comet. However the shading was removed later as it caused a lot of trouble on the Iceberg side. In addition, we ported several Parquet classes fromparquet-mrinto Comet, so now the boundary between Comet andparquet-mris fairly thin. Therefore, we could consider removingParquetFiltersand directly use the one from Spark.The advantage of this is we are able to absorb changes & improvements in the newer version of Spark. For instance, apache/spark#36696 added Parquet
In/NotInpushdown from Spark side, which is only available since Spark 3.4. At the moment, as Comet keeps a copy of Spark'sParquetFilters, the feature is not added in order to be backward compatible with Spark 3.2 and 3.3.Describe the potential solution
Evaluate whether we can remove
ParquetFiltersfrom Comet.Additional context
No response
Closed by #4363.