GitHub user MisterRaindrop added a comment to the discussion: [Proposal] 
Iceberg subsystem for datalake_fdw — design proposal

Status update, and a proposal to move this from "Under Discussion" to 
"Accepted".

Two PRs have landed: #1842, the extension skeleton, and #1951, the Parquet 
format layer (Arrow round trip, field ids, an Arrow memory pool accounted to 
the vmem tracker, type rules). Both were reviewed in the open; #1951's review 
changed two design points for the better — column matching by field id, and 
memory accounting in that PR rather than later.

What remains is tracked in #2008: twelve PRs in three waves. First, in 
parallel: S3 storage I/O, the gRPC contract, the agent's service framework and 
the fdw-side engine client. Then the agent's Iceberg operations and the Builtin 
catalog — the first catalog to work end to end, needing nothing but object 
storage — followed by the write and read paths, and one PR per external catalog 
provider: Polaris, Hive Metastore, Hadoop. Merge-on-read and DML last. Each PR 
has an issue with scope and acceptance criteria; a milestone collects them. 
Type questions with a real choice left (DECIMAL forms, timestamp units, name 
mapping) are separate issues, not blockers.

Two asks:

- The agent is Java and self-contained; the catalog providers (Polaris, Hive 
Metastore, Hadoop) are each a bounded PR with an end-to-end test to pass. If 
someone wants one, those are the items — and a Java reviewer for the agent PRs 
would be welcome.
- Unless there are objections in the next week, I will mark this proposal 
Accepted: the design as written here, with the changes recorded in #1842 and 
#1951, is what is being built.


GitHub link: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudberry/discussions/1683#discussioncomment-18461167

----
This is an automatically sent email for [email protected].
To unsubscribe, please send an email to: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to