+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 12:28 PM Szehon Ho <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 11:30 AM Andrei Tserakhau via dev < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 8:27 PM Russell Spitzer <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 1:23 PM Steven Wu <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I propose requiring each new snapshot in a v4 table to have a >>>> timestamp-ms strictly greater than its parent snapshot’s timestamp on >>>> the same branch. Root snapshots are unconstrained, and v1–v3 behavior >>>> remains unchanged. >>>> >>>> This ensures snapshot timestamps align with snapshot order. This change >>>> would resolve time travel issues caused by out-of-order snapshot >>>> timestamps. This can also enable a row timestamp metadata column inherited >>>> from the snapshot timestamp (a separate follow-up v4 spec change). >>>> >>>> Spec PR: #16294 <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16294> >>>> Reference implementation: #16293 >>>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16293> >>>> >>>> Please vote in the next 72 hours: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 Adopt the requirement >>>> [ ] +0 No preference >>>> [ ] -1 Do not adopt the requirement (please explain) >>>> >>>> Thanks, Steven >>>> >>>> >>>> Discussion thread: >>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/cln7xtjy9kw2096gzqlg5c4gg8b9td10 >>>> >>>
