>Make delete counts required to avoid ambiguity w.r.t NULL vs unknown.
Thanks Anton for driving this. Does this mean that we can't upgrade v2
table to v3 table in a lazy approach? That means it's not a mere table
metadata upgrade, but we need to upgrade all partition statistics?
On Thu, Feb 6, 20
+1 (non-binding) - love this, Anton!
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 8:54 AM Prashant Singh
wrote:
> +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:
+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 the following updates to our partition stats sp
+1 (non binding)
Regards
JB
On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 3:01 AM Anton Okolnychyi wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I propose the following updates to our partition stats spec in V3:
>
> - Modify `position_delete_record_count` to include a sum of position deletes
> across position delete files and DVs
> - Keep
+1, the spec change makes sense.
> Make delete counts required to avoid ambiguity w.r.t NULL vs unknown.
If we want to make this change, I think we need to unlink all
the partitions stats files in old snapshots (if it's already calculated
with optional delete counts) when upgrading to V3 table fr
+1
On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 12:46 AM Honah J. wrote:
> +1
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 11:42 PM Ajantha Bhat
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 11:30 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
>> etudenhoef...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 8:33 PM Dongjoon Hyun
>>> wrote:
>>>
+1
On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 11:42 PM Ajantha Bhat wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 11:30 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
> etudenhoef...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 8:33 PM Dongjoon Hyun wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for the proposal.
>>>
>>> Dongjoon
>>>
>>> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at
+1
On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 11:30 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner
wrote:
> +1
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 8:33 PM Dongjoon Hyun wrote:
>
>> +1 for the proposal.
>>
>> Dongjoon
>>
>> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 2:35 PM ConradJam wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1 (non-binding)
>> > >
>> > > Steven Wu 于2025年2月3日周一 14:08写道：
+1
On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 8:33 PM Dongjoon Hyun wrote:
> +1 for the proposal.
>
> Dongjoon
>
> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 2:35 PM ConradJam wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > Steven Wu 于2025年2月3日周一 14:08写道：
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> The spec change makes sense. left a question in
+1 for the proposal.
Dongjoon
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 2:35 PM ConradJam wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Steven Wu 于2025年2月3日周一 14:08写道：
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> The spec change makes sense. left a question in the PR.
> >>
> >> On Sun, Feb 2, 2025 at 8:52 PM roryqi wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >
Hi, Thanks for the discussions.
a) What's the reasoning behind merging the DV and position delete record
counts into `position_delete_record_count`? Would it be better to maintain
a separate counter? This way, if position delete files are deprecated in
the future, DVs remain unaffected.
Make dele
+1 (non-binding)
Steven Wu 于2025年2月3日周一 14:08写道：
> +1
>
> The spec change makes sense. left a question in the PR.
>
> On Sun, Feb 2, 2025 at 8:52 PM roryqi wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.com> 于2025年2月2日周日 10:16写道：
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 11:05 AM huaxin gao
+1
The spec change makes sense. left a question in the PR.
On Sun, Feb 2, 2025 at 8:52 PM roryqi wrote:
> +1
>
> Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.com> 于2025年2月2日周日 10:16写道：
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 11:05 AM huaxin gao
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 8
+1
Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.com> 于2025年2月2日周日 10:16写道：
> +1
>
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 11:05 AM huaxin gao wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 8:50 AM Manish Malhotra <
>> manish.malhotra.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1(nonbinding)
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 2:49
+1
On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 11:05 AM huaxin gao wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 8:50 AM Manish Malhotra <
> manish.malhotra.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1(nonbinding)
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 2:49 AM Russell Spitzer
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 3:01
+1 (non-binding)
On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 8:50 AM Manish Malhotra <
manish.malhotra.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1(nonbinding)
>
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 2:49 AM Russell Spitzer
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 3:01 AM Anton Okolnychyi
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I propose the foll
+1(nonbinding)
On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 2:49 AM Russell Spitzer
wrote:
> +1
>
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 3:01 AM Anton Okolnychyi
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I propose the following updates to our partition stats spec in V3:
>>
>> - Modify `position_delete_record_count` to include a sum of position
+1
On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 3:01 AM Anton Okolnychyi
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I propose the following updates to our partition stats spec in V3:
>
> - Modify `position_delete_record_count` to include a sum of position
> deletes across position delete files and DVs
> - Keep `position_delete_file_count`
Hi all,
I propose the following updates to our partition stats spec in V3:
- Modify `position_delete_record_count` to include a sum of position
deletes across position delete files and DVs
- Keep `position_delete_file_count` to represent the number of position
delete files (ignoring DVs)
- Add `d
19 matches
Mail list logo
