I don't think it is a good idea to add the table name to metadata because it can easily get stale and would be misleading. Table name is a catalog concern and we typically try to keep catalog concerns out of the table space. Instead, I'd suggest updating the error that your users see so that the error report has the information that you need.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 9:20 AM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > I see the table identifier (catalog.namespace.table), including the table > name, as a catalog concept rather than a table property. You can register a > table with the same location but different names, which makes sense from a > catalog perspective. > > This also makes tables more portable when moving or copying them to > different locations. What do you think? > > Yufei > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 2:38 AM Gabor Kaszab <gaborkas...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> Hi Manu, >> >> I'm just brainstorming about how this addition could be problematic: >> Even though it's not recommended, it's feasible to register the same >> table in multiple catalogs. Different catalogs could use different names >> for the same underlying table, see register_table(name, >> metadata_location) >> <https://iceberg.apache.org/docs/latest/spark-procedures/#register_table> >> . >> >> Thanks, >> Gabor >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 8:10 AM Manu Zhang <owenzhang1...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> From time to time, users ask me about the status of their Iceberg tables >>> by sending me a *path*, which they've received in a file system alert >>> email. Usually I look for the corresponding *table name *and query >>> metadata tables through Spark SQL. >>> However, it's not easy to find the table name since it's not saved in >>> the table metadata[1]. >>> >>> Do you think it's valuable to optionally add the table name in the table >>> metadata? >>> >>> 1. https://iceberg.apache.org/spec/#table-metadata >>> <https://iceberg.apache.org/spec/#table-metadata> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Manu >>> >>
