Hi Christian, There is no particular reason ETag is not included in the CommitTableResponse in the spec. In fact the reference IRC already returns ETag on that endpoint. I also had it in mind to extend the spec with this, I just wanted to finish the implementation of using ETags on the client side for the loadTable endpoint (side note, it's open for review <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14398>, any feedback is appreciated!). In terms of implementation, it is not that trivial to implement the usage of the ETag after a RESTTableOperations.commit() / refresh(), but this is another story, just the reason I wasn't in a rush extending the ETag support further in the REST spec.
Long story short, I'm +1 on this! Gabor Christian Thiel <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2025. dec. 4., Cs, 16:00): > Dear all, > I noticed that we currently don't return an etag after single table > commits. > As of now, etags are returned for CreateTableResponse and > LoadTableResponse. I browsed the original doc [1], the PR [2], the mailing > List and my brain but couldn't find a discussion around this. > > Is anyone aware of a reason why we didn't include CommitTableResponse? > If not I would start a vote on [3] to include it. > > Best, > Christian > > [1] > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rnVSP_iv2I47giwfAe-Z3DYhKkKwWCVvCkC9rEvtaLA > [2] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11946 > [3] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14760 > >
