Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

Thanks everyone for voting. The vote result is: +1: 5 (binding), 2 (non-binding) +0: 0 (binding), 0 (non-binding) -1: 0 (binding), 0 (non-binding) I'll get the proposed spec change merged. On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 4:15 AM Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for 409 > > On Tue, Mar 18

Re: [Discuss] Apache Iceberg 1.9.0 release

S3 Tables tests in Trino with 1.9.0 nightly release throws ClassCastException (RESTSigV4AuthSession → OAuth2Util$AuthSession). The test works fine in 1.8.1. I’m going to check if adjusting our test settings based on this PR ( https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11995) can fix the issue. https:/

Re: [VOTE][Go] Release Apache Iceberg Go v0.2.0 RC0

+1 (non binding) I checked: - hash and checksums are correct - LICENSE and NOTICE are ok - ASF header present (maybe we can add header in operation_string.go even if it's a generated file) - no binary found in the source distribution - go test -v worked - tested with CLI Thanks ! Regards JB On

[DISCUSS] Row lineage required for v3

Hey everyone, When Row lineage was originally introduced, it was believed to be incompatible with equality deletes and we initially added lineage as a feature that could be turned on. Now that these features can co-exist , we would

Re: [VOTE][Go] Release Apache Iceberg Go v0.2.0 RC0

+1 (non-binding) Ran verification script `dev/release/verify_rc.sh 0.2.0 0`. Built and tested examples using the CLI. Best, Kevin Liu On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 8:55 AM Matt Topol wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose the following release candidate (RC0) of > Apache Iceberg Go version v0.2.0.

Re: [VOTE] Minor simplifications for Geo Spec

+1 Yufei On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 10:42 AM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > +1 > > Kind regards, > Fokko > > Op wo 19 mrt 2025 om 18:32 schreef Huang-Hsiang Cheng > : > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Mar 19, 2025, at 9:27 AM, Brian Hulette wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> I double-checked why a JSON object was all

Re: [VOTE] Minor simplifications for Geo Spec

+1 Kind regards, Fokko Op wo 19 mrt 2025 om 18:32 schreef Huang-Hsiang Cheng : > +1 (non-binding) > > On Mar 19, 2025, at 9:27 AM, Brian Hulette wrote: > > +1 > > I double-checked why a JSON object was allowed in the first place. It > looks like the original motivation was to support PROJJSON,

Re: [VOTE] Minor simplifications for Geo Spec

+1 (non-binding) > On Mar 19, 2025, at 9:27 AM, Brian Hulette wrote: > > +1 > > I double-checked why a JSON object was allowed in the first place. It looks > like the original motivation was to support PROJJSON, but we switched to > using projjson: where points to a table property. > > On W

Re: cleanExpiredMetadata in RemoveSnapshots

I think a catalog service can also use Spark/Flink procedures for table maintenance, to utilize existing systems and cluster resources. If we no longer support new functionality in Spark/Flink procedures, we are effectively deprecating them, right? Gabor Kaszab 于2025年3月20日 周四00:07写道： > Thanks fo

Re: [VOTE] Minor simplifications for Geo Spec

+1 I double-checked why a JSON object was allowed in the first place. It looks like the original motivation was to support PROJJSON, but we switched to using projjson: where points to a table property. On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 6:45 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 2

Re: cleanExpiredMetadata in RemoveSnapshots

Thanks for the responses so far! Sure, keeping the default as false makes sense because this is a new feature, so let's be on the safe side. About exposing setting the flag in the Spark action/procedure and also via Flink: I believe currently there are a number of vendors that don't have a catalo

[VOTE][Go] Release Apache Iceberg Go v0.2.0 RC0

Hi, I would like to propose the following release candidate (RC0) of Apache Iceberg Go version v0.2.0. This release candidate is based on commit: 30705a69b6c64539c1b90852cd323088f429146c [1] The source release rc0 is hosted at [2]. Please download, verify checksums and signatures, run the unit

Re: [VOTE] Minor simplifications for Geo Spec

+1 On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 2:30 AM Gang Wu wrote: > Makes sense. > > +1 (non-binding) > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 8:07 AM Jia Yu wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> Thank you! >> >> On 2025/03/19 00:01:00 Szehon Ho wrote: >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > While working on the reference implementation

Re: [DISCUSS] Inconsistency between java implementation and spec about partition-spec and schema in v1 table

Thanks for everyone joining the discussion. I think we have reached a consensus on the approach: Read liberally and write strictly Follow the above principle in different language implementations. I'll fire a pr following Fokko's suggestion about the statement that the schemas and current-sche

Re: [VOTE] Minor simplifications for Geo Spec

+1 (binding) On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 9:30 AM Gang Wu wrote: > Makes sense. > > +1 (non-binding) > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 8:07 AM Jia Yu wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> Thank you! >> >> On 2025/03/19 00:01:00 Szehon Ho wrote: >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > While working on the reference imple

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 RC3

Hi everyone, Thanks everyone who participated in the vote for Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 RC3. The vote result is: +1: 4 (binding), 2 (non-binding) +0: 0 (binding), 0 (non-binding) -1: 0 (binding), 0 (non-binding) Therefore, the release candidate is passed. We are publishing/finalizing the re

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.2 RC3

+1 (non binding) Regards JB On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 2:00 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > Hi folks, > > We fixed the issue with CTAS and refreshing vended credentials in S3. > So I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache > Iceberg 1.7.2 release. > > The commit ID is c4e