Hi Eduard
Thanks for the update and no problem for a new RC (that's why we
test/vote for release :)).
Regards
JB
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 6:08 PM Eduard Tudenhoefner wrote:
>
> Fokko found one issue when using USE and then SHOW VIEWS (without
> specifying a namespace) with the RESTCatalog.
> W
Sorry I accidentally merged the DynamoDB deprecation PR
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/9783 without realizing the RC is
rejected. Since we need to re-cut the release, the deprecation message
needs to be updated.
Drew put up another fix (thank you!!!):
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull
Fokko found one issue when using *USE * and then *SHOW
VIEWS *(without
specifying a namespace) with the *RESTCatalog*.
While we actually test this in *TestViews *using the *InMemoryCatalog* and
things don't fail and behave as expected, that same behavior fails when
using *RESTCatalog*.
It turns out
+1 non-binding.
Ran signature, checksum, license checks and build/test with JDK11
Ran tests with views in Spark3.5/Spark3.4 and Trino with REST/JDBC catalog.
Thanks,
Amogh Jahagirdar
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 9:10 PM Jack Ye wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Checked license, signature, checksum, build,
+1 (binding)
Checked license, signature, checksum, build, test with Java17
Ran manual test with EMR 7.0 Spark 3.5 and Glue.
Best,
Jack Ye
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 7:58 PM Daniel Weeks wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Verified sigs/sums/license/build/test (Java 17)
>
> I also did manual verification of
+1 (binding)
Verified sigs/sums/license/build/test (Java 17)
I also did manual verification of view features using jdbc catalog
(postgresql).
-Dan
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 6:38 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> Correction, my vote is non-binding
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:
Correction, my vote is non-binding
Regards
JB
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:07 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> I checked:
> - signatures and checksum are OK
> - ASF license headers
> - no binary file found in the source distribution
> - LICENSE/NOTICE are OK (regarding the discu
+1 (non-binding)
* validated checksum and signature
* checked license docs & ran RAT checks
* ran build and tests with JDK11
* built new docker images and ran through
https://iceberg.apache.org/spark-quickstart/
* tested with Trino & Presto
* tested view support with Spark 3.5 + JDBC/REST catalog
+1 (binding)
I checked:
- signatures and checksum are OK
- ASF license headers
- no binary file found in the source distribution
- LICENSE/NOTICE are OK (regarding the discussion we had :) )
- Build OK with JDK11
- Tested JdbcCatalog (with different schema version) with PostgreSQL backend
- Tested
+1 (non-binding)
- verified signature and checksum
- verified RAT license check
- verified build/tests passing with JDK11
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 7:39 AM Drew wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> - verified signature and checksum
> - verified RAT license check
> - verified build/tests passing with JDK
+1 (non-binding)
- verified signature and checksum
- verified RAT license check
- verified build/tests passing with JDK17
- ran manual tests with GlueCatalog on Spark 3.5
Drew
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 9:33 AM Ajantha Bhat wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I propose that we release the following RC
Hi Everyone,
I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache Iceberg
1.5.0 release.
The commit ID is 0c8703078443a3c73a5aa5a6bd1cf904e0b5ce09
* This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.5.0-rc3
* https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.5.0-rc3
*
https://gi
12 matches
Mail list logo
