+1 (binding) Thanks Huaxin! On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 10:46 AM Anoop Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding) to deprecate equality deletes in v4. Thank you, Huaxin! > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 10:36 AM Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (binding) to deprecate equality deletes. Thanks, Huaxin! >> >> Ryan >> >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 8:16 PM huaxin gao <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Manu, >>> >>> >>> No rewrite of the existing manifests is needed. The V4 root manifest >>> references the existing V2/V3 manifests as-is (data manifests and the older >>> delete manifests), so upgrade stays metadata-only regardless of table size; >>> only the new top-level V4 metadata is written. The equality deletes in >>> those carried-over delete manifests are still applied on read (with 2-phase >>> planning) until they age off or are converted to DVs by a separate >>> maintenance action. >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Huaxin >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 10:18 AM Manu Zhang <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Huaxin, >>>> >>>> To clarify the third point: will upgrading a V2/V3 table to a V4 table >>>> require a manifest rewrite? If so, how will that process be handled? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Manu >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 10:07 AM huaxin gao <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Following the discussion thread "[DISCUSS] Deprecate Equality Deletes >>>>> in >>>>> Iceberg V4" [1], I'd like to call a vote on the following proposal for >>>>> the >>>>> V4 table spec. >>>>> >>>>> Proposal >>>>> -------- >>>>> 1. Writing new equality deletes is forbidden for V4 tables: the V4 >>>>> metadata >>>>> will not define equality deletes as an allowed entry type. >>>>> >>>>> 2. Reading equality deletes remains supported in the reference >>>>> implementation for backward compatibility, both for existing V2/V3 >>>>> tables and for equality deletes carried over into upgraded V4 >>>>> tables. >>>>> >>>>> 3. Upgrading a V2/V3 table to V4 is metadata-only (no synchronous >>>>> rewrite >>>>> of data or delete files). Existing equality deletes remain in >>>>> carried- >>>>> over V2/V3 delete manifests; converting them to deletion vectors is >>>>> a >>>>> separate, optional maintenance action. >>>>> >>>>> Rationale >>>>> --------- >>>>> Equality deletes impose an asymmetric cost paid on every read, >>>>> complicate >>>>> the format, and block features such as CDC, row lineage, and >>>>> incremental >>>>> index/materialized-view maintenance. Deletion vectors make deletion a >>>>> flat, >>>>> one-time cost, and the Flink ConvertEqualityDeletes work demonstrates a >>>>> viable replacement path, so we do not need the full replacement >>>>> completed >>>>> before forbidding new equality deletes in V4. >>>>> >>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. >>>>> >>>>> [ ] +1 Forbid writing equality deletes in V4 >>>>> [ ] +0 >>>>> [ ] -1 Do not forbid (please explain) >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/ks01jpv40qjlvz4yop5tlqv4x5oxbwy6 >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Huaxin >>>>> >>>>
