Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Hi, Jan: Thanks for the proposal. I’ve scanned the doc and left some comments. There are many interesting topics about materialized view, such as incremental mv maintenance, view matching problem. It would be great if the iceberg can support materialized view definition. On Tue, Oct 24, 2023

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Hi, JB: Thanks for replying. I still want to hear what the community thinks, and have a discussion about the format. On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 10:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Jan > > Thanks for the reminder. I will take a look. > > As proposed by Renjie a few days ago, it would be grea

Re: Nested column types and equality delete files

Hi, Micah: Iceberg spec has a clear definition of constraints about identifier id fields . I think it would make sense if equality id fields share similar constraints. On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 4:24 AM Micah Kornfield wrote: > Sorry I think

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Hey JB, I totally agree we need a place to centralize this but I'm nit a huge fan of all the lists we currently have going on the site. SSGs are just not an accessible method of storing lists. ( roadmap, blogs, videos, etc..). The roadmap is barely touched for this reason. I want to propose we mo

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Hi Brian I like the idea of GitHub. Why not enabling (in .asf.yml) GitHub discussions ? A GitHub Discussion could be a good place to share the doc and exchange both in the doc and in the discussion comments. Regards JB On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 1:13 PM Brian Olsen wrote: > > Hey JB, > > I totally

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Just to be clear: we can GH Discussions subjects template via .asf.yaml but we have to open a ticket to INFRA to enable it. Regards JB On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 1:56 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > Hi Brian > > I like the idea of GitHub. Why not enabling (in .asf.yml) GitHub > discussions ? A G

[PROPOSAL] Improve dev/check-license

Hi guys, During the 1.4.1 vote, we identified some files without ASF headers, more specifically in hidden directories (like .baseline). These files have not been detected by dev/check-license script. The reason is because the script uses apache-rat via java -jar (the Apache RAT CLI), executing th

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

GitHub Discussions could be a solution that we should consider. We used it on the Trino side but still have mixed results with it. On one hand, there's a lot of overlap between creating Issues and Discussions. In fact, GitHub allows you to migrate Issues that only involve discussing a topic, or som

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

The idea is really to "square" GH Discussion only to roadmap/design proposals. For "user support", more than Slack, I would love to see u...@iceberg.apache.org. So I would distinguish: - the design/spec proposals where we could use GH Discussions. If people use GH Discussion for support questions

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Yeah, unfortunately there's no way to limit the functionality to only facilitate this. In fact, the product that gets closest to it is GitHub Issues. I believe putting the onus on developers deeply involved in the project makes sense. Expecting users, especially newer users of a newer generation w

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Oh, I don't say we have to provide a user mailing list. Personally, I like mailing list mainly because we have https://lists.apache.org/ where we can browse and search on the mailing lists. A lot of Apache projects are using Slack or Zulip, but in parallel of mailing lists. As we say at Apache: "if

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

JB and Brian, I think we should probably move this discussion to a discuss thread specifically for the topics you want to address. We've had a few instances now where the original intent of the thread is redirected to talk about other subjects. I don't feel this is a good approach because, while

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Agreed, apologies to Jan :). JB, let's discuss this at the sync this Wed, and after that we can create a new thread if needed. On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 1:38 PM Daniel Weeks wrote: > JB and Brian, > > I think we should probably move this discussion to a discuss thread > specifically for the topics

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

Daniel is right, we deviated :) OK Brian, let's do that. Apologies. Regards JB On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 8:40 PM Brian Olsen wrote: > > Agreed, apologies to Jan :). JB, let's discuss this at the sync this Wed, and > after that we can create a new thread if needed. > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 1:

Re: Feedback on Iceberg Materialized View Spec

I added a few comments to the doc, but I think there a few other things that probably need to be considered: Do we define behaviors around freshness (fail after grace period or fall back to view definition), what is the expectation for refreshes (manual/just-in-time/lazy), etc. I think there was

Re: Community Meeting Minutes ?

Thanks for the reminder here JB. I just created a list to follow for this process so I don't forget. At some point, I'll add it to the documentation so that anyone can run this over time. I will share out the last few meeting minutes in their own threads now. On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 9:03 AM Jean-B

Meeting Minutes from 2023-07-19 Iceberg Sync

Hey Iceberg Nation, Everyone is welcome to attend syncs. Subscribe to this calendar to receive a notification. Note: This meeting note is

Meeting Minutes from 2023-08-30 Iceberg Sync

Hey Iceberg Nation, Everyone is welcome to attend syncs. Subscribe to this calendar to receive a notification. Note: This meeting note is

Meeting Minutes from 2023-09-20 Iceberg Sync

Hey Iceberg Nation, Everyone is welcome to attend syncs. Subscribe to this calendar to receive a notification. Note: This meeting note is

Meeting Minutes from 2023-08-09 Iceberg Sync

Hey Iceberg Nation, Everyone is welcome to attend syncs. Subscribe to this calendar to receive a notification. Note: This meeting note is

Meeting Minutes from 2023-10-11 Iceberg Sync

Hey Iceberg Nation, Everyone is welcome to attend syncs. Subscribe to this calendar to receive a notification. Note: This meeting note is

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PyIceberg 0.5.1 RC2

+1 (non-binding) - Verified signatures and checksums - Verified license - Ran unit tests and integration tests via make test-coverage - Tested table scan filter with multiple predicates Best regards, Jonas > On Oct 24, 2023, at 11:48, Fokko Driesprong wrote: > > Hi Everyone, > > I propose tha

Re: Meeting Minutes from 2023-10-11 Iceberg Sync

Thanks for the meeting recoding! The "AI-generated chapter summaries" don't seem very readable. Can this be improved? On Fri, Oct 27, 2023, at 05:25, Brian Olsen wrote: > Hey Iceberg Nation, > Everyone is welcome to attend syncs. Subscribe to this calendar >