+1 on the new endpoint On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 10:57 AM Amogh Jahagirdar <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 from me, just had a comment on some of the wording in the spec. > > On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 11:38 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 on the new endpoint. I agree that concurrent writes are the >> sticky part where we cannot safely use the drop endpoint. >> >> Yufei >> >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 5:57 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> It sounds like "logic" to me. Today the catalogs are dealing with that >>> "specifically". So something in the spec makes sense. >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 10:50 PM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> I just opened a PR to add an `unregister` endpoint to the REST spec, >>>> #16400 <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16400>. Unregister is >>>> the opposite of `register` and allows you to remove a table from a catalog >>>> without deleting its underlying data and metadata files. The purpose is to >>>> allow moving from one catalog to another. >>>> >>>> I think it was just an oversight that we didn't already have this. I >>>> know that we've talked about adding a way to unregister a table in the >>>> past, but I didn't see a previous email thread so I thought I'd start this >>>> one. We originally assumed that the drop table endpoint would work, but we >>>> need a different one for two reasons. First, most REST catalogs take care >>>> of table cleanup (rather than putting the responsibility on the user or >>>> engine at the time DROP is run) and we need a way to prevent files from >>>> being removed. Second, DROP doesn't work for concurrent operations. We need >>>> to return the current table state and metadata location from the >>>> `unregister` operation and have the assurance that it is the latest state >>>> from the catalog and that any other operations against the table will fail. >>>> >>>> Please take a look and reply. If there aren't many objections, I'll try >>>> to start a vote thread sometime this week. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Ryan >>>> >>>
