Rename Iceberg delete_orphan_files to remove_orphan_files

[homar]

Description

REMOVE_ORPHAN_FILES is a name used by iceberg and spark

Related issues, pull requests, and links

Documentation

( ) No documentation is needed.
(x) Sufficient documentation is included in this PR.
( ) Documentation PR is available with #prnumber.
( ) Documentation issue #issuenumber is filed, and can be handled later.

Release notes

( ) No release notes entries required.
(x) Release notes entries required with the following suggested text:
Renamed Iceberg DELETE_ORPHAN_FILES procedure to REMOVE_ORPHAN_FILES

# Section
* Fix some things. ({issue}`issuenumber`)

[findepi]

This is a breaking change, but we have an unintentional inconsistency with Spark procedures in what was intended to be modeled after them.

[hashhar]

Unfortunate but it's better to do such changes sooner rather than later.

[findinpath]

Unrelated to the current commit:
higher than -> higher than or equal to

[findepi]

Thanks for fixing this, but keep separate commit

[findepi]

a rename should be as mechanical as possible, and other fixes/improvements should be separate

[findinpath]

nit: Let's use the lowercased convention for procedure names (as documented in iceberg.rst) REMOVE_ORPHAN_FILES -> remove_orphan_files

[homar]

We do use VACUUM, OPTIMIZE, EXPIRE_SNAPSHOTS so I think REMOVE_ORPHAN_FIILES is perfectly fine here

[findepi]

makes sense, but orthogonal

[phd3]

LGTM, worth calling out the config property naming change in RN.

posted on slack, hopefully if anyone is seriously impacted we'll know if fallback is needed

[mosabua]

Doc changes look good. My one question would be if we should keep the old name as legacy config so this is not a breaking change..

[findepi]

My one question would be if we should keep the old name as legacy config so this is not a breaking change..

The procedure name changes.
While we could keep config name with @LegacyConfig, the damage will be done anyway. I think it's maybe better to break config name and procedure name alike.

[mosabua]

My one question would be if we should keep the old name as legacy config so this is not a breaking change..

The procedure name changes. While we could keep config name with @LegacyConfig, the damage will be done anyway. I think it's maybe better to break config name and procedure name alike.

Fair enough ... probably need to mention it as breaking change in the release notes..

[findepi]

Thanks everyone for the involvement.
@mosabua i am not adding RN for this, i think you'll do the wording better here. Thanks