Re: Branching and Tagging for Iceberg Views

2023-11-22 Thread Renjie Liu
Hi, Jan: Thanks for raising this. I think this case is not only branching/tagging of view, rather branching/tagging of catalog? On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 6:10 PM Jan Kaul wrote: > Thank you for your comments. I should have provided a user story to make > the use case more clear. > > While the WAP

Re: Branching and Tagging for Iceberg Views

2023-11-14 Thread Jan Kaul
Thank you for your comments. I should have provided a user story to make the use case more clear. While the WAP pattern is probably the most common usage for the branching feature of iceberg tables, it could also be used in different ways. The following is a user story showcasing the branching

Re: Branching and Tagging for Iceberg Views

2023-11-14 Thread Walaa Eldin Moustafa
Also, view metadata versions and (underlying) table snapshots/versions are orthogonal concepts. For example, theoretically, one could time-travel in views along two dimensions: view metadata version and underlying data version. Hence, I do not think that data versioning in tables corresponds exactl

Re: Branching and Tagging for Iceberg Views

2023-11-13 Thread Ajantha Bhat
Hi Jan, In my view, branches are primarily intended for isolating tests and later merging them back (commonly referred to as the WAP scenario). Tags, conversely, serve the purpose of marking significant snapshots for reproducibility or auditing. Views essentially act as a shorthand for queries. C

Branching and Tagging for Iceberg Views

2023-11-13 Thread Jan Kaul
Hi all, I was wondering what you think about a Branching and Tagging feature for Iceberg Views similar to the one for Iceberg Tables. Just that instead of having references to table snapshots you would have references to view versions. This could be accomplished similar to Iceberg Tables by in