-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
Core: Consolidate write.folder-storage.path and write.object-storage.path to write.data.path #3094
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
b12ec79
abcf950
85c9f66
45a79a0
e4517b7
9579578
5402407
0c3209b
6018496
df70964
884cbf8
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -168,6 +168,8 @@ protected Map<String, String> destTableProps() { | |
| properties.remove(LOCATION); | ||
| properties.remove(TableProperties.WRITE_METADATA_LOCATION); | ||
| properties.remove(TableProperties.WRITE_FOLDER_STORAGE_LOCATION); | ||
| properties.remove(TableProperties.OBJECT_STORE_PATH); | ||
| properties.remove(TableProperties.WRITE_DATA_LOCATION); | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. When snapshotting a table that has folder storage location set, should we also remove it in addition to write data location?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It'd be safer to remove both. Added in the new commit.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I have a PR #2966 for this change, you can either also port my tests here, or remove this and I will update that PR once this is merged.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Hi @jackye1995 , thanks for the information. I've added both
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Sure, I can do that |
||
|
|
||
| // set default and user-provided props | ||
| properties.put(TableCatalog.PROP_PROVIDER, "iceberg"); | ||
|
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nit: Do we want to update the comment for the default if not set to reflect anything about the possibility of object storage location provider?
Up to you. The more I think about it, the more I think it just complicates things and that we should just properly document the behavior on the website. But up to you.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: we can move L161 to after L144 to avoid deleting the comments and add again here.