Re: [Discuss][Vote] Spec Change - Add optional field added-rows to Snapshot for Row Lineage

+1 On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 2:53 PM huaxin gao wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 10:51 PM Gang Wu wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 2:30 PM Péter Váry >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> Steven Wu ezt írta (időpont: 2025. jan. 16., Cs, >>> 0:46): >>> +

Re: [Discuss][Vote] Spec Change - Add optional field added-rows to Snapshot for Row Lineage

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 10:51 PM Gang Wu wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 2:30 PM Péter Váry > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Steven Wu ezt írta (időpont: 2025. jan. 16., Cs, >> 0:46): >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 9:00 AM Russell Spitzer < >>> russell.s

Re: [Discuss][Vote] Spec Change - Add optional field added-rows to Snapshot for Row Lineage

+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 2:30 PM Péter Váry wrote: > +1 > > Steven Wu ezt írta (időpont: 2025. jan. 16., Cs, > 0:46): > >> +1 >> >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 9:00 AM Russell Spitzer < >> russell.spit...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Everyone! >>> >>> PR: https://github.com/apache/ic

Re: [Discuss][Vote] Spec Change - Add optional field added-rows to Snapshot for Row Lineage

+1 Steven Wu ezt írta (időpont: 2025. jan. 16., Cs, 0:46): > +1 > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 9:00 AM Russell Spitzer > wrote: > >> Hi Everyone! >> >> PR: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11976/files >> >> Split out from #11948 >> >> Working on

Re: [Discuss][Vote] Spec Change - Add optional field added-rows to Snapshot for Row Lineage

+1 On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 9:00 AM Russell Spitzer wrote: > Hi Everyone! > > PR: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11976/files > > Split out from #11948 > > Working on the row-lineage implementation made it clear that we needed a > way to get i

Re: [VOTE] Document Snapshot Summary Optional Fields as Appendix in Spec

I don't think can include the statement: "Metrics must be accurate if written" Equality deletes make this requirement very difficult to satisfy for some of the fields. The reason I suggested appendix was that we shouldn't be adding new requirements, just documenting field names for consistency ac

[Discuss][Vote] Spec Change - Add optional field added-rows to Snapshot for Row Lineage

Hi Everyone! PR: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11976/files Split out from #11948 Working on the row-lineage implementation made it clear that we needed a way to get information from the Snapshot object propagated into the Metadata layer. Sp

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Iceberg (java) 1.8.0 release

Can we also include the Comet and Iceberg integration? Here is the PR ; most of the comments have been addressed, and I am currently working with Anton to finalize this. Thanks, Huaxin On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 11:55 AM Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.c

Re: [VOTE] Document Snapshot Summary Optional Fields as Appendix in Spec

@Daniel Weeks what do you think? I know both you and I had the opposite feeling here. On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 6:21 PM rdb...@gmail.com wrote: > The content looks correct to me, but because this states a requirement > ("Metrics must be accurate if written") I would rather move this content > int

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove snapshot-id from IRC SetStatisticsUpdate

Hey Christian, Do you want to follow up with a PR? I was just reviewing a PR on PyIceberg and came to the same conclusion. Kind regards, Fokko Op di 17 dec 2024 om 23:36 schreef Marc Cenac : > +1 to removing this redundancy in the REST spec a

Re: [VOTE] Document Snapshot Summary Optional Fields as Appendix in Spec

+1 Op wo 15 jan 2025 om 16:21 schreef Eduard Tudenhöfner < etudenhoef...@apache.org>: > +1 > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 1:20 AM rdb...@gmail.com wrote: > >> The content looks correct to me, but because this states a requirement >> ("Metrics must be accurate if written") I would rather move this c

Re: [VOTE] Document Snapshot Summary Optional Fields as Appendix in Spec

+1 On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 1:20 AM rdb...@gmail.com wrote: > The content looks correct to me, but because this states a requirement > ("Metrics must be accurate if written") I would rather move this content > into the section on the snapshot summary instead of an appendix. > > On Tue, Jan 14, 20

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Iceberg (java) 1.8.0 release

Hi, Is it possible to include these two changes too? https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11906 https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11936 Thanks ismail On 2025/01/09 06:51:28 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi folks, > > We did Apache Iceberg 1.7.0 release on Nov 8, 2024. If we want to keep >

Re: [DISCUSS] Use pr title + pr description as default git commit title + message in iceberg-rust

Hi, Raul: Adding a pull request template sounds like a good idea to me, and I'll fire a pr for it. Hi, Kevin: I'm happy to take the effort to open an apache infra ticket for iceberg, iceberg-go, iceberg-python if we reached agreement. On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 6:26 PM Raúl Cumplido wrote: > +1

Re: [DISCUSS] Use pr title + pr description as default git commit title + message in iceberg-rust

+1 (non-binding) That's how we do it on Apache Arrow too. I would recommend using a pull request template too which gives some consistency to the commit messages. As an example the Arrow Go one here: https://github.com/apache/arrow-go/blob/main/.github/pull_request_template.md Regards, Raúl El