+1 (non-binding), this will be useful for catalog migration scenarios. Thanks, Alex
On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 10:40 PM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 > > On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 1:39 PM Russell Spitzer <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 3:37 PM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I think that there is general agreement for adding an `unregister` endpoint >>> to the REST spec, so I'd like to vote on the addition. The PR is #16400. >>> >>> Unregister is the opposite of `register` and allows you to remove a table >>> from a catalog without deleting its underlying data and metadata files. The >>> purpose is to allow moving from one catalog to another. This requires a new >>> endpoint because the underlying table data and metadata files should be >>> left in place, and the latest catalog state of the table should be returned. >>> >>> Please vote in the next 72 hours, >>> >>> [ ] +1: Add unregister to the REST spec >>> [ ] +0: Note a non-blocking concern . . . >>> [ ] -1: Do not add unregister because . . . >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Ryan
