+1 Thank you Ahmed! This has been a long standing issue. Hopefully we can finally resolve it!
On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 1:10 PM Chamikara Jayalath via dev < dev@beam.apache.org> wrote: > Thanks Ahmed. We have run into portable timestamp/instant related issues > several times before (Iceberg, JDBCIO etc.) and it's good to see a proposal > that takes a detailed look at this. > Added some comments. > > - Cham > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 8:53 AM Tarun Annapareddy via dev < > dev@beam.apache.org> wrote: > >> +1 good design doc. Thanks Ahmed ! >> >> Thank you, >> Tarun. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 1:34 PM Ahmed Abualsaud via dev < >> dev@beam.apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Hey all, >>> >>> A user recently reported issues reading Iceberg timestamps with the >>> Python SDK. As I investigated, I noticed some gaps in our timestamp story >>> for IcebergIO (and potentially other IOs). >>> >>> I've written a design doc to address these challenges specifically for >>> IcebergIO. The goal is to establish a more consistent and robust timestamp >>> strategy that also supports the upcoming nanosecond-precision timestamps in >>> the Iceberg v3 spec [1]. >>> >>> The doc outlines current gaps and proposes a few approaches, including a >>> preferred one that uses new logical types to ensure accuracy and >>> flexibility. It also details potential breaking changes and our plan for >>> managing them. >>> >>> Please take a look and share your feedback: >>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19wwp9-4WyE8Ctao0tb1kKCppR4NtvscZ2P2yjokALfQ/edit?usp=sharing >>> >>> [1] >>> https://iceberg.apache.org/spec/#version-3-extended-types-and-capabilities >>> >>> >>
