Hi all,

Following up on my review request from August for PR #17164:

  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/17164

Status: Manu Zhang kindly reviewed it in mid-August and left four comments.
All
four are addressed, the branch is rebased on current main with no conflicts
and
squashed to a single commit, and all 44 CI checks are green. It's been
about two
months since I opened it, and it still needs a committer to take a look.

Would a committer be willing to take a look? Happy to rework any part of it.

Thanks,
Amir Mor

On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 at 09:44, Amir Mor <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I opened PR #17164 about a month ago and it hasn't picked up a reviewer
> yet.
> The stale bot flagged it this week, so I'm following its suggestion to
> raise
> it here.
>
>   https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/17164
>
> The change adds an optional "metadata-file-size-bytes" metric to
> CommitMetricsResult, so MetricsReporter implementations can observe how
> large
> the metadata.json produced by a commit is. Today there is no way to see
> that
> through the metrics reporting API, which makes metadata bloat hard to
> track --
> and some catalogs enforce a hard cap on metadata.json size (BigLake, for
> example, limits it to 1 MiB), so operators have no signal before they hit
> it.
>
> The size is captured at write time from the PositionOutputStream rather
> than by
> re-reading the file after the commit, to avoid adding a metadata read to
> the
> commit path.
>
>
> I'm happy to rework the approach if there's a preferred way to surface
> this.
> Would anyone be willing to take a look?
>
> Thanks,
> Amir Mor
>

Reply via email to