Re: Welcome Huaxin Gao as a committer!

Congratulations Huaxin ! Best, Prashant Singh On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 7:25 AM himadri pal wrote: > Congratulations Huaxin. > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 6:45 AM Sung Yun wrote: > >> That's fantastic news Huaxin. Congratulations! >> >> On 2025/02/06 13:40:09 R

Re: [VOTE] Update partition stats spec for V3

+1 (non-binding) Thank you Anton ! Best, Prashant Singh On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 10:42 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > +1 (non binding) > > Regards > JB > > On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 3:01 AM Anton Okolnychyi > wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I propose

Re: [Discuss][Vote] Spec Change - Add optional field added-rows to Snapshot for Row Lineage

+1 (non-binding) ! Best, Prashant Singh On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 1:14 PM Daniel Weeks wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 10:39 AM Steve Zhang > wrote: > >> Thank you Russell! +1 (non-binding) >> >> Thanks, >> Steve Zhang >> >> &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing Error Handling in the Iceberg Spark Module

+1, Thanks, Huaxin ! On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 10:41 AM John Zhuge wrote: > +1 Thanks > > John Zhuge > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 9:47 AM Yufei Gu wrote: > >> +1 on the direction. It's great that Spark has standardized the error >> code so that Iceberg didn't have to rely on error messages. >> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Iceberg Summit 2025 - Selection Committee

Happy to volunteer ! On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 2:52 PM Honah J. wrote: > Thanks JB! I am very excited about this and happy to help. > > Best regard, > Honah > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 2:15 PM Steven Wu wrote: > >> happy to help. >> >> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 12:01 PM John Zhuge wrote: >> >>> Ha

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.7.0 RC1

Thank you Russell ! +1 (non-binding) - Verified signature, checksum, license, build. - ran our internal services iceberg integration tests with JDK 17 - manually tested spark-sql Thanks, Prashant Singh On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 12:32 AM Fokko Driesprong wrote: > Thanks Russel for running t

Re: [VOTE] Deletion Vectors in V3

+1 (non-binding) Thanks, Prashant On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 10:16 AM Russell Spitzer wrote: > +1 - My comments are clear on the other thread for future proposals > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 11:18 AM Szehon Ho > wrote: > >> -0 >> >> Great work and exciting functionality, but transferring concern

Re: [VOTE] Endpoint for refreshing vended credentials

+1 (non-binding) Regards, Prashant On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 10:50 AM John Zhuge wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > John Zhuge > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 9:45 AM Jack Ye wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> Best, >> Jack Ye >> >> On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 9:32 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov >> wrote: >> >>> Than

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Iceberg 1.7.0 Release Cutoff

://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11346/files . Would request you include this as well into 1.7.0. Regards, Prashant Singh On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 9:13 AM Wing Yew Poon wrote: > Hi Russell, > There is a data correctness issue ( > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11221) that I have

Re: [VOTE] Standardize vended credentials in OpenAPI spec

+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 6:53 AM Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:03 PM Yufei Gu wrote: > >> +1 >> Yufei >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 12:09 PM Daniel Weeks wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 10:42 AM Russell Spitzer

Re: [DISCUSS] Action to Rewrite Equality Deletes as Position Deletes

e/iceberg/pull/2680 [5] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/10667 Regards, Prashant Singh On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 11:19 PM Péter Váry wrote: > Hi Prashant, > > Interesting stuff! > > I have a few questions: > 1. I understand that it is easier to apply positional deletes than >

[DISCUSS] Action to Rewrite Equality Deletes as Position Deletes

Hi All, Starting this thread to revive the discussion on converting Equality Deletes as Position deletes and see if this is something community wants now (Happy to contribute in this) considering : 1/ Now it's not just flink but other writers such Kafka-Connect [1] debezium server for iceberg [2]

Re: [VOTE] Merge specification clarifications on reading/writing partition values

+1 (non-binding) Thanks Micah ! Regards, Prashant On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 11:06 AM Micah Kornfield wrote: > I've opened a PR [1] to clarify that partition columns must always be > written by implementations and that for identity transformed partition > values, the metadata from the manifest file

Re: Making the NDV property required for theta sketch blobs in Puffin

+1, to make *apache-datasketches-theta-v1* sketch has the ndv blob property always present On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 3:20 AM Piotr Findeisen wrote: > Hi, > > non-binding +1 to require that `apache-datasketches-theta-v1` sketch has > ndv blob property set. > > Best > PF > > > On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 at

Re: How and where iceberg spark streaming determines latest StreamingOffset upon trigger

eck at the beginning after line `while (shouldContinueReading) {` in `latestOffSet Seems like a valid case, do you wanna open a pr for the same ? Happy to take a deeper look and help here. Thanks, Prashant Singh On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 2:48 PM Nirav Patel wrote: > Hi Prashant, >

Re: How and where iceberg spark streaming determines latest StreamingOffset upon trigger

.com/apache/iceberg/issues/8902 Regards, Prashant Singh On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 8:46 AM Nirav Patel wrote: > > > We are encountering the following issue where spark streaming read job > from iceberg table stays stuck after some maintenance jobs > (rewrite_data_files and rewri

Re: Welcome new committers and PMC!

Congratulations, Amogh, Eduard, Szehon Well deserved ! On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 3:07 PM Steven Wu wrote: > Congrats, Amogh, Eduard, and Szehon! Well deserved. Your contributions are > much appreciated! > > On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 2:25 PM Yufei Gu wrote: > >> Congratulations, Amogh, Eduard and

Re: Welcome new PMC members!

Congratulations all ! Regards, Prashant Singh On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:48 AM Jonas Jiang wrote: > Congratulations everyone! > > Best, > Jonas Jiang > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 1:33 PM Jahagirdar, Amogh > wrote: > >> Congratulations all! >> >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.2.0 RC1

+1 (non-binding) 1. Verified checksum and signature 2. Verified license docs and ran RAT checks 3. Verified build and tests with JDK11 4. did manual testing with spark Regards, Prashant Singh On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 5:04 PM Daniel Weeks wrote: > +1 (binding) > > verified lic

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.3.0

+1 (non-binding) Release this as PyIceberg 0.3.0 Verified signatures, checksums, RAT checks. Ran the unit and integration tests as per https://py.iceberg.apache.org/verify-release/ Regards, Prashant Singh On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 5:06 PM Jahagirdar, Amogh wrote: > +1 non-binding for

Re: In Remembrance of Kyle

Exteremly sad to hear this news, Kyle was an inspiration to me, he helped me out at numerous instances with his prompt and elaborate replies and valuable guidance. He was one of the go to member for me in the community and I will miss him. Prashant On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:06 AM Driesprong, Fokk

Re: Proposal - Priority based commit ordering on partitions

Hello Everyone, Finding slightly hard to find slots where most of the folks across time zones are available / comfortable join, will hold back till then and will keep this thread updated. Apologies for any inconvenience. Regards, Prashant Singh On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 5:57 PM Prashant Singh

Re: Proposal - Priority based commit ordering on partitions

his extra info, if the writers had this info (process running against the partition) it could benefit from it, otherwise would continue working as they were without this change. Regards, Prashant Singh On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 10:39 AM Péter Váry wrote: > One more thing: > - In Hive, we order

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.0.0 RC0

b.com/apache/iceberg/pull/5860 Regards, Prashant Singh On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 4:15 AM Ryan Blue wrote: > +1 (binding) > >- Checked license docs, ran RAT checks >- Validated checksum and signature >- Built and tested with Java 11 >- Built binary artifacts with J

Re: Proposal - Priority based commit ordering on partitions

accordingly (will reach out to interested folks via slack as well to get the slots). Apologies for any inconvenience. Regards, Prashant Singh On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 11:17 AM Péter Váry wrote: > Do I understand correctly that the main issue is that the concurrent > compactions and writes

Re: Proposal - Priority based commit ordering on partitions

tober 7 is fine with me; I can do 9 pm Pacific Time if >> that is what works for you (I don't know what time zone you're in), >> although any time between 2 and 6 pm would be more convenient. >> Thanks, >> Wing Yew >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 11

Re: Proposal - Priority based commit ordering on partitions

Thanks Ryan, Should I go ahead and schedule this somewhere around 10/7 9:00 PM PST, will it work ? Regards, Prashant Singh On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 9:21 PM Ryan Blue wrote: > Prashant, great to see the PR for rollback on conflict! I'll take a look > at that one. Friday 10/7 after 1:

Re: Proposal - Priority based commit ordering on partitions

eeting (online) accordingly. Meanwhile I have a PR <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/5888> out as well, to rollback compaction on conflict detection (an approach that came up as an alternative to the proposal in sync). Appreciate your feedback here as well. Regards, Prashant Singh On

Proposal - Priority based commit ordering on partitions

would appreciate any feedback on this from the community! Thanks, Prashant Singh