+1 (binding) On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 11:03 AM Hongyue Zhang <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 10:49 AM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 10:46 AM Steven Wu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 9:56 AM Anoop Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, everyone - >>>> >>>> Following the discussion on v4 stats tightness [1], I'd like to call a >>>> vote on the spec change that replaces the per-column `tight_bounds` field >>>> with a single file-level `tight_stats` flag. >>>> >>>> Summary of the change: >>>> >>>> - Stats tightness is tracked once per file with a `tight_stats` >>>> flag on the tracked file instead of a `tight_bounds` field on every >>>> column's stats struct. >>>> - The tightness flag covers all statistics (bounds and null, NaN, >>>> and value counts), not just bounds, so metadata-only queries can >>>> trust the counts as well. >>>> - When the `tight_stats` flag is absent, readers must assume stats >>>> are not tight. >>>> - A deletion vector no longer implicitly makes stats wide; >>>> `tight_stats` is the authoritative indicator, and engines are >>>> allowed to retighten stats without rewriting data files. >>>> >>>> References: >>>> >>>> 1. Discussion thread: >>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/tv7bvqctdfh5qng1sx5rp8r4r00nsv60 >>>> >>>> 2. Design options doc: >>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/13DbwnwKQXjvY3vRcFJo-qVAQWk-GB4zLzzYmFdPntZg/ >>>> >>>> 3. Spec PR: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/18585 >>>> >>>> Please vote within the next 72 hours. >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 Adopt the tight_stats spec change >>>> [ ] +0 >>>> [ ] -1 Do not adopt, with reason >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Anoop >>>> >>>
