Thanks SeungMin for driving this FIP.

Current idea that introduced system table looks good to me. 
For the system table design, I'd like to involve Yang Guo in the review.  As we 
need to consider that system tables aren't just for lake tiering status; we 
also need system table for table consumer group maintenance as well as table 
schema change tracking. Yang Guo is already working on a preliminary design 
covering fluss system tables.
My suggestion is to align on a unified system table specification 
first—covering aspects like naming, permissions, and global/per-table 
views—before we push forward with this FIP. This approach will guarantee API 
consistency down the line.
WDYT?
Best,
Leonard

Reply via email to