Re: 1.7.1 breaking change related to ADLS support

Thanks Marc. I gonna review the new PR. Regards JB Le ven. 20 déc. 2024 à 00:48, Marc Cenac a écrit : > Yesterday we reverted the PR in main and cherry picked into the 1.7.x > branch https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11817 > > Today I have opened https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/118

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

It sounds good, +1. Thanks ! Regards JB Le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 à 08:36, huaxin gao a écrit : > Hi everyone, > > While working on integrating Spark 4.0 with Iceberg, I noticed that error > conditions in the Spark module are primarily validated through the content > of error messages. I need to rev

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

Great work! Rodrigo Meneses 于2024年12月20日周五 10:38写道： > Thanks a lots it’s a great improvement. I’ll check what’s the current > behavior that we have on flink with respect to error handling ! > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 3:46 PM Anurag Mantripragada > wrote: > >> This is great. +1 from me. Thanks

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

Thanks a lots it’s a great improvement. I’ll check what’s the current behavior that we have on flink with respect to error handling ! On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 3:46 PM Anurag Mantripragada wrote: > This is great. +1 from me. Thanks Huaxin. > > > Anurag Mantripragada > > > > > > > On Dec 19, 2024,

Re: 1.7.1 breaking change related to ADLS support

Yesterday we reverted the PR in main and cherry picked into the 1.7.x branch https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11817 Today I have opened https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11830 which is the previous code with some new tests and a fix for the breaking change On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 1:59 

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

This is great. +1 from me. Thanks Huaxin. Anurag Mantripragada > On Dec 19, 2024, at 12:39 PM, Prashant Singh wrote: > > +1, Thanks, Huaxin ! > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 10:41 AM John Zhuge > wrote: >> +1 Thanks >> >> John Zhuge >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 19, 2024

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

+1, Thanks, Huaxin ! On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 10:41 AM John Zhuge wrote: > +1 Thanks > > John Zhuge > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 9:47 AM Yufei Gu wrote: > >> +1 on the direction. It's great that Spark has standardized the error >> code so that Iceberg didn't have to rely on error messages. >> >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg Rust 0.4.0 RC2

First off, thank you all for making the time to test and verify the RC. Due to the reported issue with merge-on-read tables being able to be read without full support for positional deletes, there is a risk of introducing data correctness to our end users with this RC. Hence, I will unfortunate

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg Rust 0.4.0 RC2

Hey everyone, Unfortunately -1 (binding) from my end. It looks like we're able to read tables with merge-on-read deletes and we silently ignore them. This leads to data correctness issues and should be fixed before releasing it to the public. See #826

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

+1 Thanks John Zhuge On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 9:47 AM Yufei Gu wrote: > +1 on the direction. It's great that Spark has standardized the error code > so that Iceberg didn't have to rely on error messages. > > Yufei > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 8:47 AM rdb...@gmail.com wrote: > >> This looks li

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

+1 on the direction. It's great that Spark has standardized the error code so that Iceberg didn't have to rely on error messages. Yufei On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 8:47 AM rdb...@gmail.com wrote: > This looks like a good improvement to me. Thanks, Huaxin! > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 11:37 PM huaxi

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

This looks like a good improvement to me. Thanks, Huaxin! On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 11:37 PM huaxin gao wrote: > Hi everyone, > > While working on integrating Spark 4.0 with Iceberg, I noticed that error > conditions in the Spark module are primarily validated through the content > of error messag

Re: [DISCUSS] Spec change to fix snapshot-logs reset issue when replacing tables in REST catalog

Hey Yuya, Thanks for raising this. When possible, I'd like to avoid additional flags to avoid confusion. For example, in the PR the purge flag is only taken into account when you remove the main ref. I would be leaning towards keeping the snapshot-log, instead of purging it. The snapshot-log will

Re: [DISCUSS] REST: Way to query if metadata pointer is the latest

Hi All, Just an update that the proposal went through some iterations based on the comments from Daniel Weeks. Thanks for taking a look, Daniel! In a nutshell this is what changed compared to the original proposal: - The Catalog API will be intact, there is no proposed new API function now. With