PyIceberg doesn't produce it, or uses it at the planning phase. Curious if there is any library that actually uses this.
I do agree with Russell, and maybe deprecating this at the spec level makes more sense. Kind regards, Fokko Op di 19 aug 2025 om 17:54 schreef Russell Spitzer < russell.spit...@gmail.com>: > I'm not sure we can deprecate the column in a library version update, but > currently it is marked as optional > and I don't think the Apache Java Library even has a way of writing or > reading them. > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 10:15 AM Péter Váry <peter.vary.apa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> During the last community sync (30/07), we discussed the current state of >> the File Format API proposal [1] and found that implementing the writers >> for Positional Deletes where the actual row data is provided would >> complicate things quite a bit. >> >> The current Iceberg V2 spec [2] defines two types of position delete >> files: >> >> 1. Files that store only the file name and row position. >> 2. Files that also store the deleted row data. >> >> The 1st type of the position deletes are widely used. The 2nd type of >> deletes is defined in the spec and some tests exist in the Iceberg >> codebase, but we’re not aware of any actual implementation using the second >> type (position delete files with row data). Supporting writing V2 tables >> via the new File Format API would be simpler if we dropped support for this >> feature. >> >> I would like to hear of any uses of these delete files. If we can not >> find use-cases, then *I propose to deprecate position delete files with >> embedded row data starting from Iceberg 2.0.* >> >> Thanks, >> Peter >> >> [1] - https://lists.apache.org/thread/ovyh52m2b6c1hrg4fhw3rx92bzr793n2 >> [2] - Position Delete File Spec: >> https://iceberg.apache.org/spec/?h=delete#position-delete-files >> >
