Re: [VOTE] Row lineage required for v3

+1 Op di 1 apr 2025 om 21:15 schreef Péter Váry > +1 > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2025, 17:22 Steve Zhang > wrote: > >> +1 (non binding) >> >> Thanks, >> Steve Zhang >> >> >> >> On Mar 31, 2025, at 11:05 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> wrote: >> >> +1 (non binding) >> >> >>

Re: [VOTE] Row lineage required for v3

+1 On Tue, Apr 1, 2025, 17:22 Steve Zhang wrote: > +1 (non binding) > > Thanks, > Steve Zhang > > > > On Mar 31, 2025, at 11:05 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: > > +1 (non binding) > > >

Re: [VOTE] Row lineage required for v3

+1 (non binding) Thanks, Steve Zhang > On Mar 31, 2025, at 11:05 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > +1 (non binding)

Optimize Equality Deletes with Sorting

Hi all, I know there's been some conversations regarding optimization of equality deletes and even their possible deprecation. We have been thinking internally about a way to optimize merge-on-read with equality deletes to better balance the read performance while having the benefits of performant