+1 and I agree with Russell. v3 is still under development, so I think it's reasonable to include Variant based on the current Parquet spec.
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 10:35 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > I second Russell here. I think it makes sense to add variant type to > V3 spec, even if the implementation details will come later. > > So +1 to add in the spec. > > Regards > JB > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 6:21 PM Russell Spitzer > <russell.spit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I'm +1, > > > > 1. I don't think we are going to change our decision on whether to > include variants based on the timing of Parquet ratification > > 2. We aren't going to formally close V3 Spec yet, so if we do end up in > a situation where we want to close the spec and Parquet has not removed the > tag, we can remove the variant from the spec then. (I think that scenario > is unlikely) > > 3. There is very little in our change set here that specifically > references the Parquet spec except for our reference link to it. > > > > I don't think there is anything that will happen in the spec that will > change what we would include in the Iceberg Spec (especially in this PR) > > > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 5:10 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> My (non-binding) vote is -1 until the variant spec is formally adopted > in Parquet. > >> > >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 2:51 PM Aihua Xu <aihu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi everyone, > >>> > >>> I've updated the Iceberg spec to include the new Variant type as part > of #10831. The changes are basically complete. This is a heads-up about the > upcoming change. Please review and +1 to acknowledge, so we will merge. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Aihua >
