The vote passes with 7 binding +1's and 17 non-binding +1's, and no 0 or -1's.
Thanks everyone for the voting and discussion! Best, Huaxin On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 4:24 AM Daniel Weeks <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 9:06 AM Junwang Zhao <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 11:32 PM Maximilian Michels <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > +1 (non-binding) >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Max >> > >> > Szehon Ho <[email protected]> schrieb am Fr. 14. Aug. 2026 um >> 22:07: >> >> >> >> +1 >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Szehon >> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 10:56 AM Matt Butrovich <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> +1 (non-binding) >> >>> >> >>> Thanks Huaxin! >> >>> >> >>> -Matt >> >>> >> >>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 9:34 AM Talat Uyarer via dev < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> +1 non-binding >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 8:31 PM Alex Stephen via dev < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> +1 non-binding >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks for driving this! >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 7:17 PM Gang Wu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 9:37 AM Manu Zhang < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Thanks Huaxin! >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 7:06 AM Bryan Keller <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> +1 non-binding >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2026, at 3:55 PM, Andrei Tserakhau via dev < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 12:16 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> +1(binding) >> >>>>>>>>> Yufei >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 1:11 PM vaquar khan < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> +1 >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >> >>>>>>>>>> Viquar Khan >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026, 3:04 PM Steven Wu <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> +1 (binding) >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Huaxin for driving the discussion and thanks everyone >> for contributing. >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 11:18 AM Xin Huang via dev < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 11:13 AM Russell Spitzer < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (binding) >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 1:07 PM Hongyue Zhang < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Huaxin! >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 11:03 Gianluca Graziadei < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding ) >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The asymmetric cost argument is the decisive factor for >> me. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An equality delete allows the writer to offload work onto >> every subsequent read, and this deferred cost is neither bounded nor >> visible to the party that generated it. Deletion vectors make that cost >> explicit and ensure it is paid only once. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would also like to highlight point 3, which I think is >> underrated: making the upgrade metadata-only decouples V4 adoption from >> delete file migration. Users can move to V4 on their own timeline and >> convert equality deletes as a background maintenance task. Coupling the two >> would have turned V4 adoption into a weeks-long operational project for >> large tables. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gianluca >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Il giorno gio 13 ago 2026 alle ore 19:57 Neelesh Salian < >> [email protected]> ha scritto: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non binding) Thank you Huaxin. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 19:07 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 >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >> -- >> Regards >> Junwang Zhao >> >
