Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 rc0

I'm also -1 until we get #12095 backported to 1.7.x. We don't want to release artifacts when we know parts of the NOTICE(s) need to be corrected. Thanks, Amogh Jahagirdar On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 1:44 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Sorry (ag

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

Agreed, I wouldn't be opposed to looking into approaches to make release times more predictable. At the same time, I'd advocate that in the community, that anyone can propose a release at any point in time. Of course, we can discuss as a community and make sure there's a reasonable changeset, as we

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 rc0

Sorry (again, it's a long day): I meant this PR: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12095 On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 7:38 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > Just to be clear: we are working on new changes on NOTICE/LICENSE that > would be great to include in 1.7.x. > > See https://github.com/apa

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 rc0

Hey folks, I'm having trouble running this test successfully. I see that there was already an attempt to fix it but this is not included in the 1.7.x branch. Furthermore, running this test against the `main` branch

Re: missing files in an Iceberg table

Dan, Thanks for the pointers. Let me look into that work. - Wing Yew On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 8:49 AM Daniel Weeks wrote: > Hey Wing Yew, > > I would agree that this is a common problem and we need a way to get > tables back into a good state when something unexpected happens. Amogh and > Matt

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 rc0

Just to be clear: we are working on new changes on NOTICE/LICENSE that would be great to include in 1.7.x. See https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/903 I think it would be great to have this for 1.8.0 but also for 1.7.2. That's why I voted -1 :) Thoughts ? Regards JB On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 rc0

-1 (non binding) I actually did a change that we should "partially revert": I changed the NOTICE to use bundle name, which is not optimal. I propose to cancel this rc0 to create a rc1 fixing name in NOTICE. Sorry about that. Regards JB On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 9:41 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrot

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 rc0

+1 (non-binding) Verified signature, checksums, license, built and ran some tests locally. On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 7:50 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner wrote: > +1 (verified sigs/checksums/license/ran tests locally) > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 7:00 AM Yuya Ebihara wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> Chec

Re: [DISCUSS/VOTE] Add in ChangeLog Reserved Field IDs to Spec and Decrement Row Lineage Reserved IDs

+1 Thanks for catching this, Russell! On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:51 PM Russell Spitzer wrote: > Thanks everyone, I'll be merging that fix ASAP > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 6:01 AM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Op ma 27 jan 2025 om 10:54 schreef Honah J. : >> >>> +1, thanks for driving t

Re: missing files in an Iceberg table

Hey Wing Yew, I would agree that this is a common problem and we need a way to get tables back into a good state when something unexpected happens. Amogh and Matt have a PR (API: Define RepairManifests action interface #10784) that was originally

Re: [VOTE] Add initial/write defaults to REST spec

Thanks everyone for voting! This vote passes with the following result: +1: 6 binding, 3 non-binding +0: none -1: none -Dan On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:50 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner wrote: > +1 > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 9:35 AM Christian Thiel < > christian.t.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1 (non-bi

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 rc0

+1 (verified sigs/checksums/license/ran tests locally) On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 7:00 AM Yuya Ebihara wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Checked green CI on Trino https://github.com/trinodb/trino/pull/24814 > > BR, > Yuya > > On 2025/01/28 04:52:39 Cheng Pan wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > Pass int

Re: missing files in an Iceberg table

Hi Wing, Thank you for bringing this up. We run into this all the time, particularly when the underlying storage has data management settings outside of Iceberg's ownership (I.E. s3 retention policies). It is probably a weekly occurrence, and one of the biggest pain points for new builders. Thanks

Re: [VOTE] Add initial/write defaults to REST spec

+1 On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 9:35 AM Christian Thiel wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 at 07:34, Fokko Driesprong wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Op za 25 jan 2025 om 00:55 schreef Honah J. : >> >>> +1, thanks for driving this! >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Honah >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at

Re: [DISCUSS] Adding RemoveSchemasUpdate update type to REST spec

I agree that it makes sense to add this, so I'm +1 on this. On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 3:38 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Gabor > > Sorry for the late reply. > > It makes sense to me. Thanks ! > > Regards > JB > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:32 AM Gabor Kaszab > wrote: > > > > Hi Iceberg Comm

Re: missing files in an Iceberg table

Hi, I can also confirm that there are a number of users who find themselves unintentionally deleting some files and not being able to use their Iceberg tables anymore. The number of these incidents is surprisingly high for some reason. There was also a question on Iceberg Slack around this problem