Support Iceberg version travel by reference name#19111
Conversation
mosabua
left a comment
mosabua
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The original PR was reviewed and approved by @alexjo2144 , @findinpath , and @ebyhr . I reviewed for differences, wording on user facing messages and beyond. All looks good to me.
plugin/trino-iceberg/src/main/java/io/trino/plugin/iceberg/IcebergMetadata.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you have a plan to support CharType in follow-up?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I did not originally, but I don't see why we wouldn't want to support it. Happy to address in a follow on though if possible. Should I create a tracking issue for follow up or do you recommend I just address it here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
file an issue + add TODO comment here linking to it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TestIcebergReadVersionedTable seems a better class for testing time travel. (No need to change this PR because it requires more work)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure sounds good, when I follow up with CharType support #19111 (comment) I can move all the test in a separate commit.
plugin/trino-iceberg/src/test/java/io/trino/plugin/iceberg/TestIcebergV2.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
plugin/trino-iceberg/src/test/java/io/trino/plugin/iceberg/TestIcebergV2.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
amogh-jahagirdar
force-pushed
the
time-travel-ref
branch
from
f934e71 to
13e6c47
Compare
amogh-jahagirdar
force-pushed
the
time-travel-ref
branch
2 times, most recently
from
772fb51 to
ed66ed1
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm a little confused by this last sentence. Could you elaborate on that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@amogh-jahagirdar, let's try to do a slightly condensed version of this comment to explain how our behavior is driven by a retention policy and is not a direct parallel to git branching behavior.
Later, I want to take this comment and elaborate with some visuals to explain this behavior in more detail, and we can shorten the explanation and link to the Iceberg docs at that time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@amogh-jahagirdar, I spoke with @ebyhr on the side and he's just gonna remove that line for now and you and I should follow up and make an easy reference point in the Iceberg docs to point to about this.
Co-authored-by: Amogh Jahagirdar <amogh@tabular.io>
ebyhr
force-pushed
the
time-travel-ref
branch
from
ed66ed1 to
a64d2ee
Compare
| if (ref == null) { | ||
| throw new TrinoException(INVALID_ARGUMENTS, "Cannot find snapshot with reference name: " + refName); | ||
| } | ||
| snapshotId = ref.snapshotId(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From this implementation, it seems that there is no distinction between branch and tag queries in trino, and both are used to query a fixed snapshot ?
9 participants
Description
Support Iceberg version travel by reference name.
Note: This is a rebased version of #15646. I addressed some conflicts, added an additional test, and cleaned up a nit. @jackye1995 was the original author of this PR, I just marked myself as a co-author (let me know what is the practice followed in the Trino community).
Additional context and related issues
Release notes
( ) This is not user-visible or is docs only, and no release notes are required.
(x) Release notes are required. Please propose a release note for me.
( ) Release notes are required, with the following suggested text: