Seems like a good way forward, even if we need to iron out the details. We will need a good compression for the delete vectors if we would like to store then in the metadata files.
+1 for adding an initial draft Amogh Jahagirdar <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2026. jún. 9., K, 2:47): > I had a comment about the exception offsets, but +1 (binding) from me. > > Thanks, > Amogh Jahagirdar > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 6:08 PM Micah Kornfield <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding for me). >> >> I left some comments that I think might help with clarity for >> implementers. >> >> Ryan, given the limited nature of the vote, what do you see as the >> decision factors for actually using this? >> >> Cheers, >> Micah >> >> On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 4:21 PM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> +1 from me >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2026 at 9:01 AM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> I mentioned in the thread on adding a bitmap format for small bitmaps >>>> that I think the next steps are to get a draft spec into git (PR #16518 >>>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16518>) and then iterate on >>>> it and implementations. That will give us more information to move forward >>>> with the Mumbling bitmap format in v4 metadata or not. >>>> >>>> This vote is to add the spec to version control. It does not mean that >>>> we are using the format in tables or other places. Those uses will be >>>> covered by future votes. >>>> >>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1: Add the Mumbling bitmap spec >>>> [ ] +0: . . . >>>> [ ] -1: Do not add the spec to git because . . . >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Ryan >>>> >>>
