+1(binding) Yufei
On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 1:55 PM Péter Váry <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 > > Matt Topol <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2026. okt. 7., Sze, > 22:30): >> >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Wed, Oct 7, 2026, 4:03 PM Neelesh Salian <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> +1 (non-binding) >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2026 at 03:23 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 >>>> Reference implementation: #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
