Re: Changelog scan for table with delete files

Hey Wing Yew, I am planning to focus on this after we get partition stats readers/writers into main. I actually have ideas on how to implement changelog scans for V2 tables efficiently. - Anton пн, 10 лют. 2025 р. о 21:11 Wing Yew Poon пише: > Hi Anton, > > Thank you for looking at https://gith

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 Thanks Steve! Szehon On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 1:23 PM Yufei Gu wrote: > +1 (binding) > Yufei > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 1:20 PM huaxin gao wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:51 AM Anurag Mantripragada >> wrote: >> >>> +1 (non-binding) >>> >>> Thanks, Steve! >>>

Re: FileRewrite API refactor

looking at "RewriteDataFilesSparkAction" from your PR #11513, I am fine that the RewriteExecutionContext is captured in the `Plan` object. My earlier point is that we need to pass those common metadata/context to the executor. We don't have to define a separate `PlanInfo` for that purpose if they a

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 (binding) Yufei On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 1:20 PM huaxin gao wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:51 AM Anurag Mantripragada > wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> Thanks, Steve! >> >> ~ Anurag >> >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 13, 2025, at 10:34 AM, rdb...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> +1

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:51 AM Anurag Mantripragada wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Thanks, Steve! > > ~ Anurag > > > > > > On Feb 13, 2025, at 10:34 AM, rdb...@gmail.com wrote: > > +1 > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:56 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng > wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> O

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Iceberg release 1.8.0

I think we wanted to perform a check against the endpoint support like other view operations since they aren't expected to be implemented. PR here is what I believe we want. -Dan On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 7:37 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner wrote: > This is

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 (non-binding) Thanks, Steve! ~ Anurag > On Feb 13, 2025, at 10:34 AM, rdb...@gmail.com wrote: > > +1 > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:56 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng > wrote: >> +1 (non-binding) >> >>> On Feb 13, 2025, at 9:36 AM, Daniel Weeks >> > wrote: >>> >>> +1

Re: [VOTE] Deprecate or remove distinct_count

Xuanwo, do you favor deprecating or removing `distinct_count`? Due to lack of any real implementation, I myself favor removal (PR 12183). Jacob Marble 🔥🐅 On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:25 PM Xuanwo wrote: > Here is my +1 binding. > > The current status of `distinct_count` is quite confusing, whic

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:56 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Feb 13, 2025, at 9:36 AM, Daniel Weeks wrote: > > +1 > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:07 AM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Op do 13 feb 2025 om 18:06 schreef Steven Wu : >> >>> +1 here. >>> >>> already a

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 (non-binding) > On Feb 13, 2025, at 9:36 AM, Daniel Weeks wrote: > > +1 > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:07 AM Fokko Driesprong > wrote: >> +1 >> >> Op do 13 feb 2025 om 18:06 schreef Steven Wu > >: >>> +1 here. >>> >>> already approved t

Re: [Discussion] Versioned SQL UDFs (Catalog routines) in Iceberg

Hey everyone, During the last catalog community sync, there was significant interest in storing UDFs in Iceberg and adding endpoints for UDF handling in the REST catalog spec. I recently discussed this with Yufei to better understand the new requirement of using UDFs for fine-grained access contr

Re: [DISCUSS] Consolidate docs under Concepts and Project/Terms

I think we should do an even bigger change. IMHO, Project should have information about interacting with the project so Community Contributing Implementation Status Multi-engine Support How to Release ASF Then have Concepts include all the technical details * Spec Terms On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 1

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:07 AM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > +1 > > Op do 13 feb 2025 om 18:06 schreef Steven Wu : > >> +1 here. >> >> already approved the PR yesterday >> >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 8:17 AM Russell Spitzer < >> russell.spit...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 12,

Re: [DISCUSS] Consolidate docs under Concepts and Project/Terms

nm. Found the "Terms" from the left navigation menu under "Project". Earlier, I was looking for it from the "Project" tab which shows the "Community" page. Anyway, I agree that the content of "Terms" is more aligned with the "Concept" group than "Project" group. On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:15 AM St

Re: [DISCUSS] Consolidate docs under Concepts and Project/Terms

Manu, how to navigate to the "terms" page? I can't find the "terms" link from the project page. It seems reasonable to move the "Terms" content to the "Concept" page for easier discoverability. On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 8:43 AM Manu Zhang wrote: > Does anyone have objections to this change? If no

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 Op do 13 feb 2025 om 18:06 schreef Steven Wu : > +1 here. > > already approved the PR yesterday > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 8:17 AM Russell Spitzer > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 5:30 PM Steve Zhang >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Iceberg Community, >>> >>> I'm working on supporting th

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 here. already approved the PR yesterday On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 8:17 AM Russell Spitzer wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 5:30 PM Steve Zhang > wrote: > >> Hi Iceberg Community, >> >> I'm working on supporting the registration of iceberg metadata for an >> existing table in the cata

Re: [DISCUSS] Consolidate docs under Concepts and Project/Terms

Does anyone have objections to this change? If not, I'm going to open a PR. On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 11:43 AM Manu Zhang wrote: > Hi all, > > On the website, we have docs under Concepts with only Catalogs[1] and > Project/Terms[2] serving similar purposes. Do you think it's a good idea to > conso

Re: [VOTE] Add overwriteRequested to RegisterTableRequest in REST spec

+1 On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 5:30 PM Steve Zhang wrote: > Hi Iceberg Community, > > I'm working on supporting the registration of iceberg metadata for an > existing table in the catalog. As part of this work, I'm proposing to add > an optional boolean field in RegisterTableRequest. > > I'd lik

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Iceberg release 1.8.0

This is most likely caused by the additional checks that were added in https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11756. On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 4:16 PM Gabor Kaszab wrote: > Hi, > > I think it's because of this patch: > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commit/a2b8008da7bc26e03248a3560d1cc7e849

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Iceberg release 1.8.0

Hi, I think it's because of this patch: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commit/a2b8008da7bc26e03248a3560d1cc7e8499d Before that replaceTransaction() didn't fail if the server didn't support views, with this change it does. Anyway, I see this was merged into 1.7 too. Didn't you see the same i

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Iceberg release 1.8.0

Hi, There is a breaking change in 1.8.0 that prevents Iceberg 1.8 clients to talk to pre-1.8 Iceberg REST services. The errors manifest as something like: java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Server does not support endpoint: HEAD /v1/{prefix}/namespaces/{namespace}/views/{view} at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.8.0 RC0

A late +1 - I just got to checking the signatures, checksum, finished building and running some tests. Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2025. febr. 13., Cs, 7:43): > Thanks everyone who participated in the vote for Release Apache Iceberg > 1.8.0 RC0. > > The vote result is:

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Iceberg release 1.8.0

I'm pleased to announce the release of Apache Iceberg 1.8.0! Apache Iceberg is an open table format for huge analytic datasets. Iceberg delivers high query performance for tables with tens of petabytes of data, along with atomic commits, concurrent writes, and SQL-compatible table evolution. This

Re: [VOTE] Simplify multi-arg table metadata

Gang, that's a beautiful cat. There is so much fluff, love it! +1 votes: Gang, JB, Szehon*, Matt, Hussein, Xianjin, Rorqi, Manu, Péter*, Eduard*, Russell*, Honah*, Prashant, Steve*, Yufei*, Wing and Fokko* 0 votes: ∅ -1 votes: ∅ * binding votes Thanks everyone, I'll go ahead and merge the PR. K

[DISCUSS] OAuth2 Authentication Guide

Dear all, I would like to re-ignite the discussion around getting an OAuth2 Authentication guide into the Iceberg documentation. During the Iceberg-Catalog Meetup in December, we decided that this topic, despite affecting the Catalog most, should not only be discussed as part of the Catalog sync,