Thank you Walaa for the proposal. I think view portability is a very important topic for us to continue discussing as it relies on many assumptions within the data ecosystem for it to function like you've highlighted well in the document.
I've added a few comments around how this may impact the permission questions the engines will be asking, and whether that is the desired behavior. Sung On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 7:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <etudenhoef...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks Walaa for tackling this problem. I've added a few comments to get a > better understanding of how this will look like in the actual > implementation. > > Eduard > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 7:09 PM Walaa Eldin Moustafa < > wa.moust...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Everyone, >> >> Starting this thread to resume our discussion on how to reference table >> identifiers from Iceberg metadata, a key aspect of the view specification, >> particularly in relation to the MV (materialized view) extensions. >> >> I had the chance to speak offline with a few community members to better >> understand how the current spec is being interpreted. Those conversations >> served as inputs to a new proposal on how table identifier references could >> be represented in metadata. >> >> You can find the proposal here [1]. I look forward to your feedback and >> working together to move this forward so we can finalize the MV spec as >> well. >> >> [1] >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-I2v_OqBgJi_8HVaeH1u2jowghmXoB8XaJLzPBa_Hg8/edit?tab=t.0 >> >> Thanks, >> Walaa. >> >
