Re: Discuss proposal - IRC APIs for Multi-Statement Multi-Table Transactions

Hi Jagdeep, Thanks for the proposal! I agree with Drew’s second point emphasis on clarifying the goals for snapshot and serializable isolation guarantees before committing to catalog changes. Note a lot of the following rationale is also from this Github PR

Re: Discuss proposal - IRC APIs for Multi-Statement Multi-Table Transactions

Hey everyone, Thanks for putting this proposal together, Jagdeep! I just wanted to share a few quick thoughts from my side. There’ve been some past discussions around this topic, and we have some catalog implementations take on server-side responsibility for transaction logic for their own means.

Re: [VOTE] Small spec change for default values

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 4:42 AM Prashant Singh wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Best, > Prashant Singh > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 2:55 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner < > etudenhoef...@apache.org> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 7:31 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> wrote: >> >>> +1

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.9.0 RC2

+1 (non-binding) I confirmed that Trino CI is green. It runs tests against several catalogs, including HMS, Glue, JDBC (PostgreSQL), REST (Polaris, Unity, S3 Tables), Nessie, and Snowflake. Yuya On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 10:46 PM Ajantha Bhat wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I propose that we release t

Re: [VOTE] Small spec change for default values

+1 (non binding) Thanks, Steve Zhang > On Apr 22, 2025, at 1:41 PM, Prashant Singh wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > Best, > Prashant Singh > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 2:55 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner > wrote: >> +1 >> >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 7:31 AM Jean-Bapti

Re: [VOTE] Small spec change for default values

+1 (non-binding) Best, Prashant Singh On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 2:55 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 7:31 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: > >> +1 (non binding) >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 11:20 PM Ryan Blue wrote: >> > >> > Hi everyone, >> >

Re: Discuss proposal - IRC APIs for Multi-Statement Multi-Table Transactions

Hi Fokko, Thank you for detailed feedback! I need to think through your comments and update/reply accordingly. But I want to discuss a key goal for writing this proposal (MTMS = "Multi-Table Multi-Statement"): For MTMS txns, many un-coordinated engines could be operating on the same set of tables

Re: [DISCUSS] Table Identifiers in Iceberg View Spec

Hi Walaa, Thanks for clarifying the aspects of non-determinism. Let me try to address your questions. 1. This is my interpretation of the current spec: The view is executed when it's being referenced in a SQL statement. That statement contains the information for the query engine to resolve

Re: [DISCUSS] PyIceberg 0.9.1

Good catch on those 2 PRs! I agree with the assessment :) I just merged #1941 which is a follow up fix for #1747 . I think we should include this as well. Ideally, I would also like to get #187

Re: [DISCUSS] Table Identifiers in Iceberg View Spec

Hi Jan, Thanks for the thoughtful feedback. I think it’s important we clarify a key point before going deeper: Non-determinism is not caused by session fallback behavior—it’s a *fundamental limitation of using table identifiers* alone, regardless of whether we use the current rule, the proposed

[VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.9.0 RC2

Hi Everyone, I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg 1.9.0 release. The commit ID is 7dbafb438ee1e68d0047bebcb587265d7d87d8a1 * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.9.0-rc2 * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.9.0-rc2 * https://gi

Re: [VOTE] Small spec change for default values

+1 On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 7:31 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > +1 (non binding) > > Regards > JB > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 11:20 PM Ryan Blue wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I’d like to vote on the spec changes in PR 12841. This is a small change > that makes handling default values for

Re: Discuss proposal - IRC APIs for Multi-Statement Multi-Table Transactions

Hey Jagdeep, Thanks for proposing this. In general, it depends on what entity of the triangle (Table-format, Catalog, Engine) we want to make responsible for what operation. Where this proposal delegates more to the catalog, and what is done today in the engine itself. I went over it and added som

Re: [VOTE] Simplify multi-argument field-id(s) encoding

Thanks everyone for taking the time to vote! The vote passed with 8 binding votes and 5 non-binding votes. Kind regards, Fokko Op ma 21 apr 2025 om 05:18 schreef Renjie Liu : > +1 (binding) > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 8:43 AM Honah J. wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 17:4

Re: [DISCUSS] Table Identifiers in Iceberg View Spec

Hi Walaa, thank you for your proposal. If I understood correctly, you proposal is composed of three parts: - session default catalog as fallback for "default-catalog" - session default namespace as fallback for "default-namepace" - Late binding + UUID validation I have some comments regardi