Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Iceberg 1.11.0 RC1

[Aihua Xu]

Thanks Huaxin. I will proceed with the new RC then.  On May 12, 2026, at 9:47 PM, huaxin gao <huaxin.ga...@gmail.com> wrote:  This is a correctness issue, but it is not a new regression; the same issue already exists in 1.10. The PR description lists Trino, Impala, Comet, and iceberg-rust as affected readers. I wouldn’t call it a hard blocker for 1.11.0 because it is a pre-existing problem. Thanks, Huaxin  On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 8:44 PM Aihua Xu <aihu...@gmail.com> wrote: Huaxin, how critical is this one? The bug has been reported for a while and it's still being worked on. Can you add to the milestone 1.11.0 if it's a blocker so we can track? One more PR to consider: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15470 fixes a correctness issue in rewriteTablePath, where manifests can record stale file_size_in_bytes values for rewritten position delete files. We probably want to include this fix in 1.11 too. On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 7:33 PM Aihua Xu <aihu...@gmail.com> wrote: If it’s needed, I will wait for it. Thanks for working on them.  On May 12, 2026, at 7:17 PM, Kevin Liu <kevinjq...@apache.org> wrote:  3 of the PRs have been merged. Thank you Huaxin for the review. I merged it since it was mostly clean backports and only targets spark 3.4.  The last PR is pending CI and also a clean backport, https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16311 On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 6:52 PM Kevin Liu <kevinjq...@apache.org> wrote: I'll take a look at https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15470 Here's the Spark 3.4 PRs. I only backported PRs with relevant code changes: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16306 (Backport of #14483 + #14497) https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16307 (Backport of #15683 + #16284) https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16308 (Backport of #15832) https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16311 (Backport of #15992) This one needs to rebase #16307 above They are mostly clean backports, some with minimal change. The first 3 already passed CI.  I would like to have these in. But will defer to Aihua (RM) for the final call.  Best, Kevin Liu On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 6:39 PM Manu Zhang <owenzhang1...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Aihua, Since we plan to drop Spark 3.4 after 1.11.0, let's get the back-port PRs in. Otherwise, it will be left in a broken state. Thanks, Manu On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 9:16 AM Aihua Xu <aihu...@gmail.com> wrote: Thanks everyone for driving these blockers to closure. Kevin, since this isn’t blocking and Spark 3.4 is deprecated, I’d like to go ahead and cut the next release candidate tonight so we can move forward—unless anyone disagrees. If we end up needing another RC, we can consider adding them in. What do you think?  On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 4:48 PM Kevin Liu <kevinjq...@apache.org> wrote: Ajay's email was stuck in webmod, i just unblocked it.  Looks like all the issues in this email chain have been resolved.  - first row ID https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16263 - analyticscore https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16258 - SerializableFileIOWithSize https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16284 Thanks everyone for contributing to the fix!  The 1.11.0 milestone is 100% complete at this time, https://github.com/apache/iceberg/milestone/59 One _last_ thing, I went over the potential feature parity gap between the four different Spark versions we currently support. It looks like there are a couple of PRs that can be backported to Spark 3.4 but haven't been. Since this is the last release that supports Spark 3.4, I'd like to backport them and close the parity gap. This is completely optional since we've already marked Spark 3.4 as deprecated, but I think it's a good gesture for its final release. Best, Kevin Liu On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 3:57 PM Ajay Yadav <m...@ajay.dev> wrote: Hi Everyone, I would like to report a performance regression we've identified in Spark queries on Iceberg tables stored in cloud storage (tested with GCS), which I believe should be addressed in the 1.11.0 release. Current SerializableFileIOWithSize drops file length, causing performance regression due to excessive metadata calls in Cloud Storage: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/ssues/16283. The fix overrides InputFile newInputFile(String path, long length) to preserve file length and avoid unwanted metadata calls https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16284 On 2026/05/08 15:27:05 Péter Váry wrote: > Just to clarify: > > The following PRs are already merged to 1.11.0: > >    - https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14297 - Spark: Support writing >    shredded variant in Iceberg-Spark >    - https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15512 - Spark: fix delete from >    branch for canDeleteWhere where it does not resolve to the correct branch - >    WAP fix >    - https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15475 - Flink: Add Nanosecond >    Precision Support for Flink-Iceberg Integration > > > The missing ones are the ones backporting those to other engine versions: > >    - For: 14297 <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14297>: >       - 16241 <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16241> - Backport for >       variant shredding in Spark 4.0 >    - For: 15512 <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15512>: >       - 16245 <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16245> - Spark: >       backport PR #15512 to v3.4, v3.5, v4.0 for WAP branch delete fix >    - For: 15475 <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15475>: >       - #16183 <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16183>,  #16239 >       <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16239>, #16240 >       <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16240> - Backport for Nano >       timestamps for Flink 2.0/1.20 > > > So the PRs needed on 1.11.0 are: > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16241 > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16245 > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16183 > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16239 > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16240 > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16186 > > Aihua Xu <ai...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2026. máj. 8., P, 17:13): > > > Thank you all for the feedback and for verifying the release candidate. > > Based on the issues identified above, we will include the following fixes > > and cut RC2 with a new vote: > > > > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14297 > > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15512 > > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15475 > > https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16186 > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions or identified additional > > issues. > > > > Thanks, > > Aihua > > > > On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 10:09 PM Aihua Xu <ai...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I also looked into this. There is a configuration > >> gcs.analytics-core.enabled to enable/disable GCS Analytics Core. The > >> current implementation always requires runtime dependency of GCS Analytics > >> Core even if the configuration is off. Ideally we can lazy load such > >> dependency so the dependency is only required when the feature is > >> explicitly enabled. But since GCP is likely to enable GCS Analytics Core by > >> default, I feel it's reasonable for downstream projects using non-bundle > >> jars to add this dependency. > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 6:54 PM Steven Wu <st...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Looked a little more. > >>> > >>> So Iceberg's cloud modules consistently use compileOnly for vendor SDKs > >>> and rely on either the bundle artifact or downstream coordination for > >>> runtime. So, both changes are expected for downstream consumers using the > >>> non-bundle jars. Maybe we don't need to change anything. > >>> > >>> iceberg-gcp module > >>> > >>> compileOnly platform(libs.google.libraries.bom) > >>> compileOnly "com.google.cloud:google-cloud-storage" > >>> compileOnly "com.google.cloud:google-cloud-kms" > >>> compileOnly(libs.gcs.analytics.core) > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 6:16 PM Steven Wu <st...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Yuya, thanks for reporting the discovery. > >>>> > >>>> Azure: I approved your PR and can merge it soon: > >>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16186 > >>>> GCP: the new dependency is marked as compileOnly in PR 14333 > >>>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14333>, as it is an opt-in > >>>> feature. we need to either change the dep to implementation or update the > >>>> code similar to the Azure fix above. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 4:07 PM Yuya Ebihara < > >>>> yuya.ebih...@starburstdata.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi Aihua, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks for leading the release! > >>>>> > >>>>> Just a quick reminder about two dependency-related items from a > >>>>> downstream perspective: > >>>>> * Azure module users will require azure-security-keyvault-keys, even > >>>>> when table encryption is not used, as noted in > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16186 > >>>>> * GCS module users will require gcs-analytics-core > >>>>> > >>>>> I ran into CI failures with 1.11.0 in Trino because the project does > >>>>> not use the azure-bundle or gcp-bundle modules. > >>>>> The CI passed once we explicitly added these two dependencies. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Yuya Ebihara > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, May 8, 2026 at 4:58 AM Péter Váry <pe...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> First of all, thanks to everyone for the effort put into preparing > >>>>>> this release! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I would like to highlight that RC1 is built from a branch where the > >>>>>> following features have not been backported to all engine versions: > >>>>>> - Spark: Support writing shredded variant in Iceberg-Spark ( > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14297) - Available in Spark > >>>>>> 4.1, but not in Spark 4.0 > >>>>>> - Spark: fix delete from branch for canDeleteWhere where it does not > >>>>>> resolve to the correct branch ( > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15512) - Available in Spark > >>>>>> 4.1, but not in Spark 4.0, 3.5, or 3.4 > >>>>>> - Flink: Add Nanosecond Precision Support for Flink-Iceberg > >>>>>> Integration (https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/15475) - > >>>>>> Available in Flink 2.1, but not in Flink 2.0 or 1.20 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It is up to the community to decide whether these missing backports > >>>>>> should be considered release blockers. Most of the corresponding PRs have > >>>>>> already been merged to main (except #15512), and including them in the > >>>>>> release should be relatively straightforward. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> From my perspective, I would prefer not to release with these gaps. > >>>>>> That said, I understand the urgency and the need for a release, and I am > >>>>>> happy to go with the community’s decision. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Peter > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Aihua Xu <ai...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2026. máj. 7., Cs, > >>>>>> 18:26): > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Everyone, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I propose that we release the following RC as the official Apache > >>>>>>> Iceberg 1.11.0 release. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The commit ID is 0f657edf12dc29f8487a679bfdd4210e9588d014 > >>>>>>> * This corresponds to the tag: apache-iceberg-1.11.0-rc1 > >>>>>>> * > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/commits/apache-iceberg-1.11.0-rc1 > >>>>>>> * > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/tree/0f657edf12dc29f8487a679bfdd4210e9588d014 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The release tarball, signature, and checksums are here: > >>>>>>> * > >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/iceberg/apache-iceberg-1.11.0-rc1 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You can find the KEYS file here: > >>>>>>> * https://downloads.apache.org/iceberg/KEYS > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Convenience binary artifacts are staged on Nexus. The Maven > >>>>>>> repository URL is: > >>>>>>> * > >>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheiceberg-1278/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Please download, verify, and test. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Instructions for verifying a release can be found here: > >>>>>>> * https://iceberg.apache.org/how-to-release/#how-to-verify-a-release > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg 1.11.0 > >>>>>>> [ ] +0 > >>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this because... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Only PMC members have binding votes, but other community members are > >>>>>>> encouraged to cast > >>>>>>> non-binding votes. This vote will pass if there are 3 binding +1 > >>>>>>> votes and more binding > >>>>>>> +1 votes than -1 votes. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >