Thanks for the clarification! Just to confirm — even though the entityId is globally unique, we’ll still require catalogId + entityId at the persistence API level to perform an entity lookup now and in the future, correct?
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 1:45 PM Dennis Huo <huoi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Correct, the entityId must be unique across all types. > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 12:30 PM Eric Maynard <eric.w.mayn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I believe that entity ID by itself is meant to be a unique identifier. > > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 12:27 PM Honah J. <hon...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > I have a question about what constitutes a unique identifier for an > > entity > > > in Polaris in the future. > > > > > > Right now, `lookupEntity` takes catalogId, entityId, and typeCode, > > > following a recent refactoring (in a PR > > > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1112>). On the other hand, > > > `lookupEntities` currently takes a list of PolarisEntityId, which only > > > includes catalogId and entityId, and is assumed to represent unique > > > entities. > > > > > > I understand the refactoring is still in progress, but I’d like to > > clarify > > > the intended direction: > > > Will the unique identifier eventually include typeCode as well? Or do > we > > > still consider catalogId + entityId sufficient for uniqueness, with > > > typeCode used solely for lookup optimization? > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Honah (Jonas) > > > > > >
