Hi all,

Thanks for taking a stab on this issue and the constructive discussion!

Very strictly speaking this would be a breaking REST API change.
I propose to consider making those technical identifiers
case-insensitive in a future version of the REST API.

Robert

On Mon, Jan 5, 2026 at 6:32 PM Innocent Djiofack <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Dmitri,
>
> Thanks for your prompt reply.
>
> I understand your point about the added complexity in JSON serialization
> and agree that, from a user perspective, it is not a major hindrance to
> productivity. I am comfortable with either outcome and will be happy to
> follow the direction the community decides to take on this issue.
>
> Best regards,
> Innocent
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2026 at 10:20 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Innocent,
> >
> > I appreciate your involvement in this project and your contribution towards
> > [996]!
> >
> > You PR [3349] looks correct and concise.
> >
> > However, it does introduce extra complexity into the serialization of
> > Polaris data over JSON. Given that the case insensitivity consents in [996]
> > are about technical type IDs, I personally do not think adding complexity
> > in JSON (de-)serialization in this case is worth the feature.
> >
> > Assuming existing error messages on type name mismatches are clear, I think
> > it should be fairly straight-forward for clients / users to use upper case
> > type IDs.
> >
> > If other people think that having case insensitive type IDs is still worth
> > the extra code complexity, PR [3349] looks good to me from the technical
> > perspective.
> >
> > [996] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/996
> >
> > [3349] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3349
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Dmitri.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 2, 2026 at 12:50 AM Innocent Djiofack <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > > My name is Innocent. I am a new apache Polaris user who is strongly
> > > interested in contributing to the code base. I have been looking at #996
> > > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/996> and given the back and
> > > forth
> > > on the issue as well as the guidance from Dmitry, I thought it would be a
> > > good idea to start this thread to align on what should be done.
> > >
> > > As a quick refresher, the issue is that storage type is not case
> > sensitive.
> > > Attempting to create catalogs with storage type different `file` instead
> > of
> > > `FILE` or `s3` instead of `S3` will fail. Other operations requiring the
> > > storage type will also fail.  On the user side, once the issue is
> > detected
> > > it is generally quite easy to fix. However, user experience will be much
> > > improved if users don't have to worry about such details, so I think
> > making
> > > storage type case insensitive would be an improvement.
> > >
> > > Before I get into how we would want to do it, I would like to gather
> > > opinions on the matter before I invest more time into looking at how the
> > > change would look like.
> > >
> > > Thank you for having me in the community!
> > >
> >

Reply via email to