[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc2)

Thank you everyone for voting, we got the consensus in the voting window and hence consider the vote pass from Apache Polaris (incubating) PPMC. I will now open a vote thread in the incubator for IPMC. Vote counts are as follows : 5 +1 (binding) votes : Yufei, JB, Kent, Robert, Dmitri 1 +1 (non-b

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc2)

Thank you everyone for voting, we got the consensus in the voting window and hence consider the vote pass from Apache Polaris (incubating) PPMC. I will now open a vote thread in incubator Vote counts are as follows : 5 +1 (binding) votes : Yufei, JB, Kent, Robert, Dmitri 1 +1 (non-binding) vote: P

Re: [DISCUSS] Request-scoped PolarisMetaStoreManager

Hi Michael, Good point about calls from application-scoped objects into request-scoped objects! I believe it is rather an omission in the current code rather than a deliberate design decision :) Do you happen to have some specific examples handy? I'd like to review what's involved, but I do not re

Re: [DISCUSS] Publishing Apache Polaris Python CLI to PyPI and Nightly Build

Hi I'm supporting this. However, as packages on PyPi are considered as "release artifacts", it has to be legally correct regarding The ASF policy. Several Apache projects already publish PyPi packages (for instance https://superset.apache.org/docs/installation/pypi/). As we are in the incubator,

Re: [DISCUSS] Request-scoped PolarisMetaStoreManager

Hi Michael, Could you share some more details about non-CDI environments? What would be the basic approach to creating services and related objects in runtime? I imagine it eventually comes down to creating java objects. What CDI can do automatically, can be done without CDI too. Why would passi

Re: [OpenAPI Modification] Change revokeGrantFromCatalogRole successful status to 204 (No Content)

Hi Adnan, Thank you for starting this discussion. Your point about the status code for the revokeGrantFromCatalogRole is valid, however, from my POV it is a very minor point considering the structure of the Management API requests and responses in general. For example, the deletion of grants is

Re: [DISCUSS] Support pre-creating catalogs

To clarify my earlier email: Certain call paths require the storage config to be provided at catalog creation time, IIRC. At the same time processing storage config requires access to feature flags. Admins can indeed manage grants without exposing access to end users. However, I think the chicken

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Alexandre Dutra and Michael Collado to the Apache Polaris PPMC

Congratulations folks ! -- Pierre On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 2:45 AM Dennis Huo wrote: > Congrats! > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 4:54 PM Honah J. wrote: > > > Congrats Alex and Michael! Well deserved! > > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 5:08 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov > > wrote: > > > > > Congrats, Alex an

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

Definitely agree on calling this out on CHANGELOG / release notes as this is a big behaviour change. Just want to double confirm what the next steps are, for me, do we want to cancel the RC-0 (to update CHANGELOG) or keep it ? considering the current state of the CHANGELOG Best, Prashant Singh On

Re: [DISCUSS] Create user mailing list

Hi I would propose to join The ASF Slack workspace: I don't see the login as an issue, and we would benefit to pro plan for free (with Apache services integration). Thoughts ? That said, Slack and the user mailing list are different discussions imho. Regards JB On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 10:47 P

Re: [DISCUSS] Request-scoped PolarisMetaStoreManager

> I imagine it eventually comes down to creating java objects. What CDI can do automatically, can be done without CDI too. > Why would passing CallContext to constructor parameters be significantly harder than passing it to method parameters? I mean, in an extreme scenario, you could describe nea

[DISCUSS] Use PrincipalEntity in PolarisMetaStoreManager.createPrincipal

Hello everyone, I have a PR in review that reworks "PolarisMetaStoreManager.createPrincipal" from operating on "PolarisBaseEntity" to operating on "PrincipalEntity": https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2518 This provides more type-safety and property validation and thus simplifies both me

Re: [DISCUSS] Support pre-creating catalogs

Could an administrator implement this two-step process by first creating the catalog and granting themself " CATALOG_MANAGE_CONTENT " before doing any other grants? --EM On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 10:25 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Dmitri > > That's a good point. > Imho, we should have a t

Re: [DISCUSS] Support pre-creating catalogs

I’m okay if there are strong and common use cases that genuinely require a catalog-level ALLOW_SETTING_S3_ENDPOINTS. I also agree with Eric that the separation between catalog config and storage config isn’t always straightforward. That said, to avoid premature optimization, I suggest we first val

[OpenAPI Modification] Change revokeGrantFromCatalogRole successful status to 204 (No Content)

Hi all, This is a dedicated email thread for the proposal at #2616 , which I’ve proposed for a potential 2.0.0 release. The rationale for making this change is that returning a 201 (Created) response code is incorrect and technically, in violation o

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

Hey folks The reg tests do run in CI, but the cloud-provider-specific tests don’t run unless you specify a bucket/role for each. We had discussed getting those cloud resources sponsored (I bring it up periodically at Snowflake 😆), but to date, there are no resources devoted to running those tests

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Alexandre Dutra and Michael Collado to the Apache Polaris PPMC

Congrats! On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 4:54 PM Honah J. wrote: > Congrats Alex and Michael! Well deserved! > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 5:08 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov > wrote: > > > Congrats, Alex and Michael! > > > > Cheers, > > Dmitri. > > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 5:41 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > wro

Re: [PROPOSAL] Create a dedicated Project in Github for Apache Polaris Python Package Maintenance

Oops, sorry about the confusion with the source repository... I guess I was reading too fast :) Using a separate GH project/board for python CLI sounds good to me. Cheers, Dmitri. On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 1:33 PM Honah J. wrote: > Thanks for the proposal! > > There seems to be some confusion he

Re: [DISCUSS] Publishing Apache Polaris Python CLI to PyPI and Nightly Build

Jonas, thanks for kicking this off! This sounds like a great direction! Publishing the Python CLI to PyPI will definitely make installation much smoother and improve UX. Nightly builds on Test PyPI are also nice for faster iteration and early feedback. I’m fully supportive of moving forward with th

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc1)

+1 (non-binding), thanks Prashant for driving this! - Verified signature/checksum - build and tests Hit the "Keycloak IT" failure but this is known to be flaky on MacOS. Best regards, Jonas On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 10:58 AM Pierre Laporte wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Verified: > 1 - Checksums

Re: [PROPOSAL] Polaris onboarding/user experience and Polaris UI

Hi It’s also what I did. I think we agreed on: 1. Have a “standalone” UI (not shipped in the Polaris server). 2. Have a multi catalog/instance UI, so basically with a configuration to define several instance endpoints. I started 2 with a minimal backend (with file store). Regards JB Le lun. 13

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add Data Lake operational metrics to Polaris

On Fri, Oct 3, 2025 at 7:28 PM Eric Maynard wrote: > > IMHO, we should not add a dependency between this proposal and other > efforts that are not implemented yet, as it would prevent us from moving > forward on operational metrics until all the pieces are in place. > > This is an interesting arg

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

Hi Prashant, Re: RC1: I believe we need to change two things: 1) switch ALLOW_NAMESPACE_CUSTOM_LOCATION to be `true` by default (behaviour prior to PR [2422]) 2) update CHANGELOG Since it's a substantial change, I suppose we ought to do it on `main` via the normal PR process first, then back-por

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Alexandre Dutra and Michael Collado to the Apache Polaris PPMC

Congrats Alex and Michael! On 2025/10/08 09:33:56 Pierre Laporte wrote: > Congratulations folks ! > > -- > > Pierre > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 2:45 AM Dennis Huo wrote: > > > Congrats! > > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 4:54 PM Honah J. wrote: > > > > > Congrats Alex and Michael! Well deserve

Re: [DISCUSS] Support pre-creating catalogs

Hi Michael, > ALLOW_SETTING_S3_ENDPOINTS in particular doesn't have a catalog-level configuration key The reason for that is precisely that such a key is currently not effective at all... > Shouldn't catalog creators be able to specify some of these overrides by setting properties on the catalog

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Alexandre Dutra and Michael Collado to the Apache Polaris PPMC

Congratulations Alex and Michael! On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 18:05 Sung Yun wrote: > Congrats Alex and Michael! > > On 2025/10/08 09:33:56 Pierre Laporte wrote: > > Congratulations folks ! > > > > -- > > > > Pierre > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 2:45 AM Dennis Huo wrote: > > > > > Congrats! >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

Hey Michael, Seems like it's indeed due to a change to make ALLOW_NAMESPACE_CUSTOM_LOCATION as default false (which was true before) as yufei mentioned. My understanding is, we don't run our reg tests via CI, this would have seeped through. Let me fix it and add a note in the release guide to catch

Declarative RBAC Config

Hi folks, One of the things that’s been a little painful for us operating Polaris is configuring new catalogs or ensuring that a catalog has the roles and grants configured that we expect. Has there been any interest or thought put into an idempotent “apply” action for principal roles, catalog

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

Hi Prashant, IIRC, Michael supported a CHANGELOG fix too (in earlier emails) :) I'd also add that CHANGELOG being in the source bundle is more durable than release notes, which are only published on the web site. Thanks, Dmitri. On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 7:12 PM Prashant Singh wrote: > I was pr

Re: Moving forward with #2735

Makes sense. If there’s a clear plan to have this PR be part of a feature in Polaris or an improvement to one of its APIs, I’m totally supportive of merging this change. >From your response, it sounds like this is a prerequisite to another PR that you have planned, so I'll be sure to check that o

Re: [DISCUSS] Create user mailing list

All makes sense to me. Thanks a lot, JB! Yufei On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 10:58 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > I think we can be pragmatic: > 1. When we have questions/help request, and we think it’s a good > question/comment, we should both populate the doc and send a message to the > dev@ mail

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc1)

+1 (Non-binding) Verified signatures and checksum: ``` ahemani@F7Q5C90CJX polaris-1.2.0-rc1 % gpg --verify apache-polaris-1.2.0-incubating.tar.gz.asc gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-polaris-1.2.0-incubating.tar.gz' gpg: Signature made Mon Oct 13 09:42:44 2025 PDT gpg:using E

Re: Moving forward with #2735

> Instead, the approach on the PR seems to sort of "backdoor" in an API change without an ML thread by first making the persistence-related changes that optimize that API I'm still not sure what that means. I asked in the PR what API you're suggesting and you never answered. Do you mean a new REST

Re: [DISCUSS] Request-scoped PolarisMetaStoreManager

Thanks for this refactoring proposal, Christopher! I think it makes the code align better with CDI concepts and should make it easier to evolve the codebase. I fully support moving in this direction. As for downstream projects, as far as I can tell, it should still be possible to inject custom re

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

Hi, Two comments: 1. I agree with the discussion, and I think it makes sense to cancel RC0 (don't forget to send a message with [CANCEL][VOTE] on the mailing list) and prepare RC1 2. Please in the future, create a separate thread for discussion, just to avoid long discussion in the vote thread. It

[Polaris Community Meeting] October 16, 2025

Hi everyone, Thanks for the Polaris Community meeting yesterday. Here's the main takeaways/updates (as always, we don't take any decision during Community Meetings): - Highlights (JDBC schema evolution, federation, CLI changes) - 1.2.0-incubating release is on vote - Dell ECS: discussion about the

Re: [DISCUSS] Choose the name for Apache Polaris python package distributions

Hi Anna and All, > - polaris-catalog - taken https://pypi.org/project/polaris-catalog/ Apparently it is taken by Anna [1] who is a Polaris committer. Does anyone know previous plans for that project? [1] https://home.apache.org/phonebook.html?uid=annafil Cheers, Dmitri. On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 a

Re: Aurora postgres passwordless DB

To sync up with GH, here's the Aurora PR: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2650 Kudos to Fabio for implementing it. Cheers, Dmitri. On 2025/09/08 12:16:22 "Rizzo Cascio, Fabio" wrote: > Hi guys, > > I was trying to create use the helm chart and new image to deploy Polaris in > our clust

Re: Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Add JDBC Metastore table index

Sounds good! Let us know if you need any help on the doc/blog publication. Yufei On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 2:26 AM artur rakhmatulin < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for your interest in this topic and the valid points you've raised. > I agree that understanding the write-si

[VOTE] to use apache-polaris as official Apache Polaris Python package name

Hello everyone. I am opening a VOTE to use "apache-polaris" as the name for the official Python package of Apache Polaris. -Why this is necessary was discussed here [1] -"apache-polaris" fully complies with the Apache Distribution Guide [2] -Initial Issue - Package Python CLI tool in the binary

Re: [DISCUSS] Choose the name for Apache Polaris python package distributions

Hi All, I suppose the vote that Jonas proposed on the package name will need to follow the consensus approval approach (since it ultimately affects code) without a lazy consensus [1] (using lazy consensus for this would be the same as approving the corresponding PR). If that passes, we'll still fo

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC: OPA-based authorization for Polaris

Hi everyone, Thanks for all the thoughtful feedback on the OpaPolarisAuthorizer RFC[1] and PR[2]. There’s been a healthy discussion around the project structure, so I’ve added an RFC addendum summarizing the options and trade-offs to help us reach consensus and move the PR forward. My recommen

Re: [DISCUSS] Request-scoped PolarisMetaStoreManager

Thanks for the proposal and the effort of this refactoring, Christopher! Really appreciate the detailed summary of pros and cons in the document I share some of Michael’s concerns and wanted to add a bit more perspective: 1. Removal of CallContext from PolarisMetastoreManager As also mentioned in

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC: OPA-based authorization for Polaris

It's a very nice and useful proposal, IMHO. Thanks for driving it, Sung! I added some minor comments to the doc. The rough edges related to per-realm configuration and federated principals can probably be addressed later. What is your plan for opening the related GH PR for general review (it's st

Re: [PROPOSAL] Create a dedicated Project in Github for Apache Polaris Python Package Maintenance

Any committer has the permission to create a GitHub Project. Happy to do so or I guess Jonas can do it :) Regards JB On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 7:07 PM Artur Rakhmatulin wrote: > > Hello everyone. Thank you for your comments. I'm glad this initiative > greeted well. > > I believe it will bring the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

-1 regression tests are failing: regtest-1 | t_pyspark/src/test_spark_sql_s3_with_privileges.py ..FF... [100%] regtest-1 | regtest-1 | === FAILURES === regtest-1 | ___ test_spark_creates_table_in_custom_

Heads-up: multiple PRs incoming for polaris-tools for ASF guidelines compliance

Hello everyone The polaris-tools repository does not (yet) conform to the ASF incubation guidelines. Typically, tools either do not include a :rat task, the LICENSE file, the incubation DISCLAIMER file, or NOTICE files. I am addressing each problem in a separate pull request so that each PR is t

Re: [DISCUSS] Choose the name for Apache Polaris python package distributions

Thanks for bringing this up! "apache-polaris" as a Pypi repo name sounds good to me. Flink uses the same naming schema: https://pypi.org/project/apache-flink/. Are we still able to use a shorter package name like "pypolaris"? For example, Flink's package name is pyflink[1]. from pyflink.common im

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal: Add batch authorizeOrThrow API for fine-grained AuthorizableOperations

Hi Jonas, While I do not see any major problem with the current state of PR 2767 (using default methods, which I mentioned in GH is a minor concern), I agree with Michael that it might be worth taking a more holistic approach to updating the authorizer API to avoid having too many method variants

Re: [VOTE] to use apache-polaris as official Apache Polaris Python package name

+1(binding) Yufei On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 8:43 AM Prashant Singh wrote: > +1 (nb) > > Best, > Prashant Singh > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 8:03 AM Honah J. wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > Best regards, > > Jonas > > > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 9:49 AM Russell Spitzer < > russell.spit...@g

Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: KMS Key addition for s3

Hi Mike, 2. Yes, that is correct. The override should be already doable in Polaris during a table creation, something like this: { "name": "my_table", "location": "s3://your-bucket/path/to/table", "schema": { "type": "struct", "fields": [ { "id": 1, "name": "id", "type": "lo

Re: [DISCUSS] Choose the name for Apache Polaris python package distributions

Hi Artur, Thanks for the clarification and for putting together the draft PR! I was mainly thinking that it might help to have a separate [VOTE] thread to keep the decision record clear, especially since the package rename is quite a significant change. Once the package is released and published

Re: [PROPOSAL] Introducing Entity "tag" and ABAC

Hi Dmitri Yes that’s the idea: same permissions but attached to tags instead of entities (and entities will have tag). We can imagine to use this model by default using “default” tag for instance. Regards JB Le mer. 15 oct. 2025 à 19:07, Dmitri Bourlatchkov a écrit : > Hi JB, > > This is cert

Re: [DISCUSS] Create user mailing list

Searchability and the 90-day message retention limit on Slack are valid concerns. That said, Slack really shines for quick, real-time discussions, something email doesn't handle as well. To address the retention issue, one option could be securing sponsorships to upgrade to Slack Pro. I don’t thin

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add Data Lake operational metrics to Polaris

Hello! Just want to add my 2 cents here. Using external engines to handle heavy I/O operations looks well justified. On the other hand it was mentioned that there are metrics that could be handled by Polaris itself, though someone needs to control when they are calculated, pushed to storage etc.

Re: [DISCUSS] Use PrincipalEntity in PolarisMetaStoreManager.createPrincipal

Thanks for starting this discussion, Christopher! I approved the PR in GH. I think it is a valuable refactoring and it aligns with our code evolution approach [1] [1] https://polaris.apache.org/releases/1.1.0/evolution/ Cheers, Dmitri. On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 4:39 AM Christopher Lambert wrote:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Polaris onboarding/user experience and Polaris UI

Hello. Thank you very much for the detailed information provided. Regarding point 1, I don't have a strong opinion about whether this should be a separate UI application or part of Polaris Deployment together with "polaris-server". Regarding point 2, could you please clarify? As I understand it, P

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

+1(binding) Here are things verified: 1. Checksum, signature 2. Build passed after downloading the latest tarball with a known issue in an env of Macbook + Docker, more details can be found in https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/2501. 3. Run the command "bin/admin" and "bin/server" in the bin

Re: [DISCUSS] Support pre-creating catalogs

Hi Yufei, The ALLOW_SETTING_S3_ENDPOINTS flag affects catalogs. Is it not natural to allow different catalogs to have different values for this flag? ... especially considering that there is config method [1] for checking these flags with the following parameters: getConfig(PolarisConfiguration

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal: Add batch authorizeOrThrow API for fine-grained AuthorizableOperations

Thanks for the feedback! > support the commitTransaction API Totally makes sense! It might depend on how we model the fine-grained authorizable operations for commitTransaction. But If we reuse the fine-grained operations defined for updateTable, we may need a new wrapper type that encapsulates ea

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Alexandre Dutra and Michael Collado to the Apache Polaris PPMC

Congratulations guys. On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 6:40 PM Adam Christian < [email protected]> wrote: > Congrats, y'all! > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 9:05 AM Keith Chapman > wrote: > > > Congratulations, Alex and Michael. Well deserved!!! > > > > Regards, > > Keith. > > > > On Wed, Oct 8

Re: [PROPOSAL] Create a dedicated Project in Github for Apache Polaris Python Package Maintenance

Thanks for the proposal! There seems to be some confusion here, I think Artur is proposing to add a project/board for the python package instead of migrating the client to a separate repo? I share the same idea that python CLI would be better to remain in the polaris main repo since it is widely u

[DISCUSS] Proposal: Add Server Header in Polaris API Responses

Hi all, Continuing the discussion from here on github issue During recent development and debugging sessions, we noticed that Polaris API responses currently do not include any server identification headers. For example, a typical response to a POST

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc2)

+1 Verified the RC using a script in the PR [1], that checks: * Signatures + checksums * LICENSE/NOTICE/DISCLAIMER are present * Build passes * Staged build artifacts match artifacts from a local build against the RC Git commit (towards reproducible builds) Robert [1] https://github.com/apache/p

Re: [DISCUSS] Support pre-creating catalogs

Hi Dmitri That's a good point. Imho, we should have a two step approach for catalog creation: first create the "abstract" entity, and then all permission, etc. Regards JB On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 5:36 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote: > > Hi All, > > Our feature flags code supports setting flags per

Re: [PROPOSAL] Polaris onboarding/user experience and Polaris UI

Hello. I would like to propose my help in this initiative if needed. I also lately build a personal Polaris UI with the minimal functionality for managing roles and principals. Initially my motivation was to have a minimal interface which could help to better understand all relations between entit

Re: [DISCUSS] Discussion on pagination of non-IRC APIs

+1, fully agree. Reusing the existing IRC pagination spec and implementation makes perfect sense, it keeps consistency across APIs, avoids duplicate logic, and simplifies client integration. Yufei On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 5:10 PM Eric Maynard wrote: > +1, this was my intent with the original p

[DISCUSS] Choose the name for Apache Polaris python package distributions

Hello everyone! As part of the "Package Python CLI tool in the binary distribution #2419" initiative [1], we need to agree on the package name for Apache Polaris Catalog that will be used for publishing to PyPI. The current name "polaris" cannot be used as it's already taken by another package unre

Re: Heads-up: multiple PRs incoming for polaris-tools for ASF guidelines compliance

Thanks for doing this! For the benchmarks/ tool, I guess we need a NOTICE file as well [1], even if it just contains the "bare minimum", as other (3rd party) work can be derived from the benchmarks tool. But even if we do not need it, it doesn't hurt to have it? [1] https://infra.apache.org/licen

Re: DISCUSS: 1.2 release

Thank you everyone for your awesome work, I wanted to share that all the 1.2 critical fixes are in ! At this point the window for including more changes 1.2 is closed (obvious if anything critical comes up, we should definitely discuss and make a call on it together). I will start prepping the RC f

Re: [DISCUSS] Fixing JDBC upgrades in a parch release (ASAP)

Stepping back on 1.1.1 a bit... We're almost ready to release 1.2.0, so it might be preferable to release JDBC fixes in 1.2.0 so as not to waste effort on making a patch release immediately followed by a "better" minor release. Cheers, Dmitri. On 2025/09/25 22:23:45 Prashant Singh wrote: > +1 o

Python client: remove Python 3.9 support #2795

Python 3.9 will be EOL by the end of the month (https://peps.python.org/pep-0596/). Raise this PR to drop it once we are ready. PR: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2795

Re: Aurora postgres passwordless DB

Hi Yufei, Would you be ok with making doc changes in a follow-up PR? Thanks, Dmitri. On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 8:06 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote: > Hi Yufei, > > We discussed docs in GH comments. I believe the plan is to make doc > changes in a separate PR. > > Cheers, > Dmitri. > > On Thu, Sep

Re: [VOTE] Change Create APIs to Return Newly-Created Objects

+1 Both to the vote and Dmitri's rules analysis :) On 2025/09/22 19:11:31 Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote: > PR 2603 got merged, so I'll summarize the vote results: > > +1: 2 binding (Yufei Gu, Dmitri Bourlatchkod), 3 non-binding (Alexandre > Dutra, Michael Collado, Honah J.) > +0: none > -1: none > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Create user mailing list

Last time I checked, ASF slack workspace only allows people with asf email addresses to join, is that rule still valid? But I agreed that we should have a separate thread for Slack. To be clear, I'm totally fine with a user mail list, my only concern is the fragmentation of the community. In a wo

Re: [VOTE] use pypolaris for Apache Polaris CLI tool from python package

Thanks for driving this, Artur! > avoid collisions with the existing ./polaris executable in the Apache Polaris project We could rename the tool in that case. I heard different voices about the names, mostly between the current name "polaris", and the proposed one "pypolaris". Can we give peopl

Re: [DISCUSS] Support pre-creating catalogs

Hi Yufei, > Hi Dmitri, could you elaborate a bit more on the intended use case? Please see https://lists.apache.org/thread/4mxk3p9qdsjmty9yqyrjoow522722r2s Cheers, Dmitri. On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 1:51 PM Yufei Gu wrote: > I'm also not sure ALLOW_SETTING_S3_ENDPOINTS is the best example to > i

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC: OPA-based authorization for Polaris

Hi Yufei, Sung, I agree with Yufei's point about the awkward relationship between runtime-service and OPA extension that current PR (and layout option 3 in the doc) causes. However, I do not agree that this can be resolved in a follow-up PR. I believe it is preferable to ensure proper isolation o

Re: DISCUSS: 1.2 release

Hi Prashant I'm doing a check on the "legal" (LICENSE, NOTICE, etc in the packages). I will eventually open PRs. I will keep you posted. Regards JB On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 8:34 AM Prashant Singh wrote: > > Thank you everyone for your awesome work, I wanted to share that all the > 1.2 critical

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add Data Lake operational metrics to Polaris

Thanks for the reply, Pierre and Oleg! As I mentioned earlier, we could distinguish metrics into two categories in terms of how we collect them: 1. Handled directly by Polaris, e.g., metrics derived from the metadata.json file or ingested through the IRC metrics endpoint (/v1/{prefix}/na

[DISCUSS] Request-scoped PolarisMetaStoreManager

Hello everyone, I have put up a PR that reworks "PolarisMetaStoreManager" to be request-scoped: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2555 From my perspective this cleans up / improves the design around persistence access in the code base without sacrificing any flexibility. I have create

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

Hi Michael, Are these tests part of our normal GH CI? Thanks, Dmitri. On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 8:10 PM Michael Collado wrote: > -1 > > regression tests are failing: > > regtest-1 | t_pyspark/src/test_spark_sql_s3_with_privileges.py > ..FF... [100%] > regtest-1 | > regtest-1 | ==

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc1)

Thanks for the catch and the change JB ! I will work on preparing rc2 then and send a cancel vote mail bump. > As already mentioned, I will create another PR to simplify LICENSE/NOTICE files to avoid this issue in the future. Agree, without this we can't automate the releases. Best, Prashant Sin

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add Data Lake operational metrics to Polaris

Thanks Yufei My bad! I just changed the sharing settings to enable comments. Here are some possible answers for your questions As I review, I had a few questions/clarifications: > >- For trivial metrics derivable from metadata.json, do you envision >external services recalculating them

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add Data Lake operational metrics to Polaris

> IMHO, we should not add a dependency between this proposal and other efforts that are not implemented yet, as it would prevent us from moving forward on operational metrics until all the pieces are in place. This is an interesting argument given that the delegation service proposal you mention w

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Alexandre Dutra and Michael Collado to the Apache Polaris PPMC

Great news! Congratulations! ср, 8 окт. 2025 г. в 14:48, Ajantha Bhat : > Congratulations guys. > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 6:40 PM Adam Christian < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Congrats, y'all! > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 9:05 AM Keith Chapman > > wrote: > > > > > Congrat

Re: [DISCUSS] Discussion on pagination of non-IRC APIs

Hi Andrew and everyone, Adding pagination to the Management API would be very helpful. As to reusing the pagination parameter sepantics of the Iceberg REST spec... I'm not so sure. I do believe that servers should have ultimate control over page sizes. So any client-side "size" parameters should

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Polaris 1.2.0-incubating (rc0)

I'd love to have a real s3 test as part of CI. There were some discussions in the community. Basically, we need to figure out both infra(e.g., who owns the AWS account) and sponsorship. Let's revive the discussion in another thread. For 1.2 release, +1 on adding ALLOW_NAMESPACE_CUSTOM_LOCATION rel

Re: [VOTE] use pypolaris for Apache Polaris CLI tool from python package

Thank you JB and Yufei for all clarifications. Let's consider this one as DECLINED. I will start a new one with following the established rules. On 18/10/2025 05:11, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: Either way is fine with me. Imho a complete new vote would be probably clearer. Regards JB On Fri

Re: [PROPOSAL] Create a dedicated Project in Github for Apache Polaris Python Package Maintenance

Thank you, Jonas, for volunteering this! I see it's already done - https://github.com/orgs/apache/projects/540/views/1?layout=board Happy pythonning! On 18/10/2025 06:10, Honah J. wrote: Thanks Artur and JB! I can help create it and link issues/PRs there. Will do it tomorrow : ) Best rega

Re: [VOTE] use pypolaris for Apache Polaris CLI tool from python package

Hello Yufei, thank you for asking. I believe that -1 is an option for keeping the name. If we do not gather enough votes for renaming tool, we keep the current. Just to clarify, the current name is "polaris". On 15/10/2025 20:37, Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote: Hi Yufei, AFAIK at ASF voting is a

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal: Add batch authorizeOrThrow API for fine-grained AuthorizableOperations

Hi Honah, thanks for starting this discussion. I’m really excited to see the community already thinking ahead about how we can evolve our authorization APIs, especially alongside the ongoing OpaPolarisAuthorizer work. I’m supportive of the proposed batch API addition. It seems like a natural ne

Re: [DISCUSS] Create user mailing list

I agree that the User ML and Slack Workspace are separate discussions. Let me pull the Slack discussion into a separate email thread, so we can keep this targeted on the User ML. Go team, Adam Christian Principal Software Engineer [email protected] LinkedIn Profile

Re: [DISCUSS] Upgrade support in the Admin Tool

I love that we are thinking about how to ensure users get a smooth upgrade experience. Thanks, Prashant & Yufei, for starting to chip away at this! I think that Issue #2675 is a great start. I would say that it probably makes sense to not only run JDBCPersistence against all schema versions, but I

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC: OPA-based authorization for Polaris

Sung, thanks for working on this. Did one round of review. Dimitri, it makes sense to mark it as "beta". It's a big feature, we couldn't finish it in one PR. We could focus on the first PR, and add more later. Yufei On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 1:45 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov wrote: > Hi Sung, > > Re:

Re: [VOTE] use pypolaris for Apache Polaris CLI tool from python package

As discussed yesterday and just to remind the good practice: 1. A vote is not "always" required, lazy consensus can be used, without a need for a vote 2. A vote is to answer a "closed" question, not choose between open a, b, c. A vote should be yes for that, not for that. 3. A vote email should ha

Re: [DISCUSS] Discussion on pagination of non-IRC APIs

+1, this was my intent with the original pagination interface. I think we already added this to the generic table interface, too. —EM On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 5:08 PM Andrew Guterman wrote: > Hey folks, > > I wanted to gauge sentiment on adding pagination to non-IRC APIs, such as > the managemen

[PROPOSAL] Introducing PolarisAuthorizers chain

Hi folks, I would like to propose a new way to deal with PolarisAuthorizers. Today, the PolairsAuthorizerImpl is using one PolarisAuthorizer (injected with CDI using the corresponding qualifier). It works great for our current use cases. However, we see new Authorizers joining the party (a new on

Re: [VOTE] to use apache-polaris as official Apache Polaris Python package name

+1 (binding) Since this vote is for a name that ends up in code, I propose to use the consensus approval [1] process (at least 3 binding votes, no vetoes) and a 72 hour minimum voting time window. [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting Cheers, Dmitri. On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 6:18 AM Artur

Re: [DISCUSS] Choose the name for Apache Polaris python package distributions

Unfortunately, `pypolaris` is also taken by another project: https://pypi.org/project/pypolaris/#description On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 2:15 PM Yufei Gu wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up! "apache-polaris" as a Pypi repo name sounds > good to me. Flink uses the same naming schema: > https://pypi.o

  1   2   >