Skip to content

Conversation

@ggershinsky
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@ggershinsky
Copy link
Contributor Author

cc @huaxingao

&& !Objects.equals(
base.properties().get(TableProperties.ENCRYPTION_TABLE_KEY),
metadata.properties().get(TableProperties.ENCRYPTION_TABLE_KEY))) {
throw new RuntimeException("Cannot modify key in encrypted table");
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should this be IllegalState / IllegalArgs exception ?

Comment on lines +329 to +330
base.properties().get(TableProperties.ENCRYPTION_TABLE_KEY),
metadata.properties().get(TableProperties.ENCRYPTION_TABLE_KEY))) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IIUC, this now means table REPLACEs must have the same key property as before (+ you can't add a key when you replace).

Makes sense to me. WDYT about adding a test case to document that?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sure, will appreciated if you'd add it in 14659 or 13225.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@huaxingao huaxingao merged commit d7f8950 into apache:main Dec 5, 2025
44 checks passed
@huaxingao
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @ggershinsky for the PR! Thanks @singhpk234 @smaheshwar-pltr for the review!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants