+1 binding

Thanks Steven!

On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 11:54 AM Daniel Weeks <[email protected]> wrote:

> I followed up with Steven offline and with the updates I'm changing my
> vote to a +1.
>
> Thanks Steven!
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 12:49 PM Daniel Weeks <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> -1 (for now)
>>
>> Steven, I'm not sure we've had enough discussion on this and what we're
>> actually trying to solve for.  The PR looks like we're just updating the
>> description, but there's really no functional change here.
>>
>> There's actually a more significant discrepancy in that the
>> create/rename/register view can only return a ViewAlreadyExistsError even
>> if it's a table and create/rename/register Table can only return a
>> TableAlreadyExistsError even if it's a view.
>>
>> I think clarifying the description doesn't really address this issue and
>> functionally we've strictly defined two specific return types that are
>> aligned with their specific load routes, but identifier uniqueness spans
>> multiple.
>>
>> I also don't know what else may collide (functions, indexes, etc.). Some
>> of this might be engine specific.
>>
>> I just don't feel like this is the right way to address it (though I
>> could be convinced otherwise if there something specific we need to solve
>> in the near term).
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 11:09 AM Steven Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> The REST spec currently defines six write operations that return a 409
>>> Conflict when an identifier already exists. However, the descriptions
>>> of what constitutes a conflict are inconsistent:
>>>
>>>    - Enforcing cross-type uniqueness (table or view):
>>>       - renameTable, renameView, registerView say: *"already exists as
>>>       a table or view"*
>>>    - Only enforcing within the same type (table or view only):
>>>       - createTable, registerTable, createView say: *"table already
>>>       exists"* / *"view already exists"*
>>>
>>>
>>> I'd like to propose a vote on a small clarification in the REST spec to
>>> apply the same wording of "*The identifier already* *exists as a table
>>> or view*" across all 6 endpoints.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15691/changes
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Steven
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

Reply via email to