Vladimir, what is the context in which you want to maintain a partition
spec with only void transforms? Is this in a v2 table? In a v2 table, the
catalog should be free to remove void transforms. They are required for v1.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 5:00 AM Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@querifylabs.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When a user creates a table with void() transform on a single column, REST
> catalogs appears to ignore this, and ends up with a table with no
> partitioning information. The relevant code part is in
> RESTSessionCatalog.createChanges:
>
> PartitionSpec spec = meta.spec();
> if (spec != null && spec.isPartitioned()) {
> changes.add(new MetadataUpdate.AddPartitionSpec(spec));
> } else {
> changes.add(new
> MetadataUpdate.AddPartitionSpec(PartitionSpec.unpartitioned()));
> }
>
> My question is whether this is by design or not? From the user
> perspective, this appears to be ok, because the table is not partitioned
> anyway. However, some engines, such as Trino, currently retain void()
> partitioning info for non-REST catalogs. What would be the proper
> expectation from the Iceberg user in this case - should it observe void()
> in table schema or not?
>
> Regards,
> --
> *Vladimir Ozerov*
> Founder
> querifylabs.com
>
