zhoujinsong commented on PR #3482: URL: https://github.com/apache/amoro/pull/3482#issuecomment-2796265961
This PR raised an issue worth discussing. Amoro defines a unified configuration to ensure all table formats can use it to specify maintenance behaviors, but each table format may also have its own configuration that express exactly the same meaning. When table format have their own configurations, should we maintain compatibility? I believe we can attempt to support them but with clear priority rules, such as(Lower items take higher priority): - Amoro's default configuration value - Catalog-level table format configuration value - Catalog-level Amoro configuration value - Table-level table format configuration value - Table-level Amoro configuration value This follows the principle: table-level configurations > catalog configurations > default configurations, and Amoro configurations > table format configurations. HDYT? @smallyao @XBaith -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
