Re: [Discuss] Apache Iceberg 1.9.0 release

Hi Ajantha I will help on the Flink PR. However I don’t think we need to hold 1.9.0 for Spark and Flink updates. We can always include that in the next release cycle. I propose to focus on issues and check the milestone on GH. Regards JB Le jeu. 27 mars 2025 à 07:11, Ajantha Bhat a écrit : >

Re: [Discuss] Apache Iceberg 1.9.0 release

Latest update on the release: As discussed in the last community sync, I have waited for the Spark 4.0 release. But the RC3 has failed. Flink 2.0 has been released, there is an open PR to include it at the Iceberg. It didn't make any progress this wee

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Iceberg Go Release v0.2.0

Hey Craig, The downloads page on the main iceberg site only seems to track the Java releases. So that wouldn't have been relevant on this announcement. Golang also doesn't use any binary artifacts for releases (the git tag is sufficient). The announcement email included the link [1] to the GitHub

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Iceberg Go Release v0.2.0

Woot! Can't wait to see this in action at the Iceberg Summit. Thanks for working on the release. BTW here's the apache distribution for iceberg-go 0.2.0 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/iceberg/apache-iceberg-go-0.2.0/ Best, Kevin Liu On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 12:26 PM Matt Topol wrote:

Variant bound spec

Hi everyone, I'm updating the spec to define the lower/upper bounds for shredded Variant PR#12658 . Basically we are using a Variant object to hold the bound value for each shredded subcolumn as discussed in the community sync. Let me know if you have

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Iceberg Go Release v0.2.0

Hello everyone, I'm pleased to announce the release of Apache Iceberg Go v0.2.0! 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 t

Re: [VOTE][RESULT][Go] Release Apache Iceberg Go v0.2.0 RC1

The vote passes with 3 binding +1 votes and 1 non-binding +1 vote. Thanks everyone! Can a PMC member please run the release script with `dev/release/release.sh v0.2.0 1`? As it requires PMC permission to upload the release tarball to the SVN repository. Thanks! On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 1:11 PM A

Re: [VOTE][Go] Release Apache Iceberg Go v0.2.0 RC1

+1 (binding) Ran the verification script and some basic tests against REST Thanks, Amogh Jahagirdar On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 1:22 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner wrote: > +1 (binding) > > * ran the verification script > * ran a few local tests against a REST catalog > > Thanks everyone > > On Tue, Mar 25

Re: cleanExpiredMetadata in RemoveSnapshots

Thanks for the responses! My concern is the same, Manu, Peter: many stakeholders in this community don't have a catalog that is capable of executing table maintenance (e.g. HiveCatalog) and rely on the Spark procedures and actions for this purpose. I feel that we should still give them the new fun

Re: [DISCUSS] Move iceberg-cpp step forward

Thanks Xuanwo for the summary. I think it's a good idea to move c/cpp related code to iceberg-cpp repo, and have a try on the cxx binding approach. On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 6:54 PM Junwang Zhao wrote: > Hi xuanwo > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 2:36 PM Xuanwo wrote: > >> After a deeper discussion w

Re: cleanExpiredMetadata in RemoveSnapshots

I know of several companies who are using either scheduled stored procedures or the existing actions to maintain production tables. I don't think we should deprecate them until there is a viable open solution for them. Manu Zhang ezt írta (időpont: 2025. márc. 19., Sze, 17:52): > I think a catal

Re: [DISCUSS] Move iceberg-cpp step forward

Hi xuanwo On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 2:36 PM Xuanwo wrote: > After a deeper discussion with friends in the Slack #cpp channel, we > reached the following consensus: > >- iceberg-rust won't maintain any c/cpp related code. >- iceberg-cpp will have an internal crate based on iceberg-rust and

Re: [DISCUSS] Update supported blob types in puffin spec

Hey Denys, I have gone through the proposal and it seems adding additional stats to partition stats spec is requested by both Trino and Hive community. I feel keeping column level stats per partition will definitely help the query planner to make better decisions. I saw that document didn't get en

Re: [VOTE][Go] Release Apache Iceberg Go v0.2.0 RC1

+1 (binding) * ran the verification script * ran a few local tests against a REST catalog Thanks everyone On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 7:48 PM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Thanks for running this release Matt, and for adding the additional tests! > > Checked the V1/V2 metadata/manifes