+1 (binding) with note:  I think we need to update the type from
`timestamptz` to just `timestamp`.  I don't think we want timezone involved
with the value and inheriting from, snapshot timestamp, doesn't make sense
since it's effectively timestamp without timezone.

I don't think that should block the vote, since we're largely just voting
on baselining the spec language, but it would be good to address.

-Dan

On Tue, Nov 3, 2026 at 3:06 PM Hongyue Zhang <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2026 at 2:08 PM Anurag Mantripragada via dev <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2026 at 11:38 AM Anoop Johnson via dev <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2026 at 8:19 AM Steven Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>
>>>> Add my own vote.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2026 at 12:04 PM Gábor Kaszab via dev <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 (nb)
>>>>>
>>>>> Gabor
>>>>>
>>>>> Yufei Gu <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2026. nov. 2., H,
>>>>> 20:40):
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>>> Yufei
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2026 at 11:27 AM huaxin gao <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > +1 (non-binding)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Sat, Oct 31, 2026 at 10:52 AM Russell Spitzer <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> +1 binding
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On Sat, Oct 31, 2026 at 12:00 AM Maninder Parmar <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2026, 7:20 PM Junwang Zhao <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2026 at 1:48 AM Steven Wu <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > Hi,
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > I propose adding a _last_updated_time metadata column to row
>>>>>> lineage for v4
>>>>>> >>>> > tables. It records the timestamp of the snapshot that last
>>>>>> updated a row,
>>>>>> >>>> > complementing _last_updated_sequence_number with a wall-clock
>>>>>> time.
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > Summary of the spec change:
>>>>>> >>>> > * New reserved metadata column _last_updated_time
>>>>>> (timestamptz).
>>>>>> >>>> > * New optional tracking field snapshot_timestamp (timestamptz)
>>>>>> in v4 manifests.
>>>>>> >>>> >   Writers leave it null for added entries and for entries
>>>>>> modified by
>>>>>> >>>> >   column files. On read, a null value is inherited from the
>>>>>> snapshot's
>>>>>> >>>> >   timestamp-ms.
>>>>>> >>>> > * Upgrading to v4 does not require rewriting manifest lists or
>>>>>> manifests.
>>>>>> >>>> >   Pre-v4 metadata is read as if snapshot_timestamp is null, so
>>>>>> exising rows
>>>>>> >>>> >   get the timestamp of the last snapshot before the v4 upgrade.
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > This works well with the earlier v4 spec change that requires
>>>>>> monotonically
>>>>>> >>>> > increasing snapshot timestamps (#16294). Because each
>>>>>> snapshot's timestamp-ms
>>>>>> >>>> > is strictly greater than its parent's on the same branch,
>>>>>> _last_updated_time
>>>>>> >>>> > follows the same order as _last_updated_sequence_number.
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > This enables queries for when a row was last updated and for
>>>>>> >>>> > rows modified since a given time, without mapping sequence
>>>>>> numbers
>>>>>> >>>> > back to snapshots that may have expired.
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > Spec PR: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/18526
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > Please vote in the next 72 hours:
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > [ ] +1 Adopt the spec change
>>>>>> >>>> > [ ] +0 No preference
>>>>>> >>>> > [ ] -1 Do not adopt the spec change (please explain)
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > Thanks, Steven
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > Discussion thread:
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/cln7xtjy9kw2096gzqlg5c4gg8b9td10
>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> > Monotonic snapshot timestamp PR:
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16294
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> --
>>>>>> >>>> Regards
>>>>>> >>>> Junwang Zhao
>>>>>>
>>>>>

Reply via email to