+1, I also am fine with the name. On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 10:30 PM Steven Wu <stevenz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In the 1.10.0 RC5 voting thread > <https://lists.apache.org/thread/rt4tk652wmw5ht9gb34dhrx1gwgolzkh>, > Christian brought up an inconsistency issue between the spec and the Java > implementation. Spec removed the `added-rows` while the Java implementation > continued to use and encode it. > > After some discussion, the consensus is to bring it back in the spec. > Otherwise, the REST catalog server would need to read the manifest list > file to compute the number to increment the table's next-row-id when > writing metadata.json. This would also restore the consistency between the > spec and Java impl. > > The field name is not accurate anymore. It should actually be > `assigned-rows`. But for compatibility reasons, we think it is better to > keep it as it is. We will clarify its purpose in the spec language. > > Here is the PR that rectifies the spec. > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14048 > > Thanks, > Steven >
