I have the feeling that the current pros and cons from the summary
target a version of the MV spec that wasn't really part of the
discussion. The current arguments target a completely new specification
for materialized views which we agreed on, is out of scope. Instead of a
completely new specification the argument was made for a MV metadata
object that embeds the View and the Table metadata, which was Option 6
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1a0tlyh8f2ft2SepE7H3bgoY2A0q5IILgzAsJMnwjTBs/edit#gid=0&range=G3>
in Jack's summary document. With that approach the "commitView" and
"commitTable" operations don't have to be changed and only the
"loadView" operation has to be adopted. Additionally, compaction and
snapshot expiration can be reused for the embedded solution. With that
in mind, the cons 2, 4, 5, 6 from the summary don't really apply.
Furthermore, I think we should distinguish between pros and cons for the
implementers and the users. Because most of the pros (no new operations)
for separate objects (option1) are for the implementers and most of the
pros (single logical object, doesn't require 2 loads) for combined
objects (option3) are for the users. In my opinion, in the long run the
design decisions should be focused more on the user preferences than the
implementers.
On 3/25/24 14:49, Benny Chow wrote:
Hi Manu
This is Walaa's Spark implementation for option 1:
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/9830/files/a9e1bee3b5bf5914e5330d3b195042aea33868c9
There's no code for option 2 yet.
Best
Benny
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 12:37 AM Manu Zhang <owenzhang1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Thanks Walaa for the summary. It's unclear to me which are the
reference implementation for option 1 and reference MV spec for
option 2 from the context. I can find some links in the References
section but not sure which should be referred to respectively.
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 3:38 AM Walaa Eldin Moustafa
<wa.moust...@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Himadri for the questions. At this point, our objective
is to have a common understanding of both options and their
pros and cons. The best way to achieve this is to iterate on
the doc to discuss the details of each option or their pros
and cons. We can always add more details or update the pros
and cons. The main thing is to keep the options to two so that
we keep the scope manageable.
Once we have a common understanding, it will be easy to make a
choice and move forward. Therefore, I would suggest reframing
your questions as either adding suggestions to add more
details to the options, questions on how either works, or
discussions of their pros and cons on the doc.
Thanks,
Walaa.
