+1 (binding) Thanks, Amogh Jahagirdar
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 1:39 PM rdb...@gmail.com <rdb...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 12:32 PM Daniel Weeks <dwe...@apache.org> wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 2:41 PM Russell Spitzer < >> russell.spit...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 4:37 PM rdb...@gmail.com <rdb...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> I'd like to vote on PR #10955 >>>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/10955> that has been open for >>>> a while with the changes to add new type promotion cases. After discussion, >>>> the PR has been scoped down to keep complexity low. It now adds: >>>> >>>> * An `unknown` type for cases when only `null` values have been observed >>>> * Type promotion from `unknown` to any other type >>>> * Type promotion from `date` to `timestamp` or `timestamp_ns` >>>> * Clarification that promotion is not allowed if it breaks transform >>>> results >>>> >>>> The set of changes is quite a bit smaller than originally proposed >>>> because of the issue already discussed about lower and upper bounds values, >>>> and it no longer includes variant. I think that we can add more type >>>> promotion cases after we improve bounds metadata. This adds what we can now >>>> to keep v3 moving forward. >>>> >>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1, commit the proposed spec changes >>>> [ ] -0 >>>> [ ] -1, do not make these changes because . . . >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Ryan >>>> >>>
