Hi Yufei, Thanks for opening this discussion, I agree that we could improve the naming.
I have a slight preference for Option 1, first because it's more extensible: realms could maybe require more properties one day, e.g. a state (initializing/active/inactive/deleted). But also because using strings as CDI beans requires us to annotate them, so Option 2 boils down to something like `@Inject @Realm String realm` each time we need to inject the realm. All in all, I think that's more verbose than just `@Inject Realm realm`. Thanks, Alex On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 2:51 AM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Folks > > I wanted to share my thoughts on the ongoing discussion in PR #741 > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/741>. about whether to use Realm > or > RealmId. > > The more I consider it, the more it seems that the name Realm is the more > natural choice. It is more an atomic concept, much like the concept of a > region in AWS. > > If we take a closer look at the current usage across Polaris—in > documentation, error messages, and configurations—realm and realmId are > already used interchangeably. In fact, in most cases, we simply use realm > rather than realmId. > > Here are a few examples in the Polaris repo: > > Error Messages: > > > - realm: <realm> root principal credentials: > <client-id>:<client-secret> > > Configurations: > > - Polaris.realm-context.realms > - jdbc:h2:file:./build/test_data/polaris/{realm}/db > > Documentation: > <https://polaris.apache.org/in-dev/unreleased/metastores/> > > <https://polaris.apache.org/in-dev/unreleased/metastores/> > - <https://polaris.apache.org/in-dev/unreleased/metastores/>Metastores > <https://polaris.apache.org/in-dev/unreleased/metastores/> > - Configuring Polaris for Production > < > https://polaris.apache.org/in-dev/unreleased/configuring-polaris-for-production/ > > > - Admin Tool <https://polaris.apache.org/in-dev/unreleased/admin-tool/> > > Proposal > > Based on this consistency and the conceptual clarity it brings, I proposed > two options: > > Option 1, using the name realm instead of realmId throughout Polaris and > still keeping the interface (public interface Realm) for dependency > injection purposes. The interface can be extensible in case we want to add > any subconcept to the realm, which may never happen to be honest. > > Option 2, purely using a string for realm instead of an interface, this is > simpler ultimately, but not extensible and needs more effort to refactor > the current code. > > > Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this. > > > Yufei >
