if S3FileIO is supposed to be used with other file systems, we should consider proper class renames. just my 2c
On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 5:07 PM Mayur Srivastava < mayur.srivast...@twosigma.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > > We are using S3FileIO to talk to the GCS backend. GCS URIs are compatible > with the AWS S3 SDKs and if they are added to the list of supported > prefixes, they work with S3FileIO. > > > > Thanks, > > Mayur > > > > *From:* Piotr Findeisen <pi...@starburstdata.com> > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 1, 2021 10:58 AM > *To:* Iceberg Dev List <dev@iceberg.apache.org> > *Subject:* Re: Supporting gs:// prefix in S3URI for Google Cloud S3 > Storage > > > > Hi > > > > Just curious. S3URI seems aws s3-specific. What would be the goal of using > S3URI with google cloud storage urls? > > what problem are we solving? > > > > PF > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 4:56 PM Russell Spitzer <russell.spit...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Sounds reasonable to me if they are compatible > > > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 8:27 AM Mayur Srivastava < > mayur.srivast...@twosigma.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We have URIs starting with gs:// representing objects on GCS. Currently, > S3URI doesn’t support gs:// prefix (see > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/master/aws/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/aws/s3/S3URI.java#L41). > Is there an existing JIRA for supporting this? Any objections to add “gs” > to the list of S3 prefixes? > > > > Thanks, > > Mayur > > > >
