+1 on updating the name to be more accurate — I was initially confused when I first saw the field name.
The new proposed name 'DELETE_VIEW_METADATA_ON_DROP' sounds much more clear to me, or if we would like to stay more consistent on the term used, maybe we can call it 'PURGE_VIEW_METADATA_ON_DROP'? Best Regards, Yun On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 7:34 AM Russell Spitzer <russell.spit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > My only thought on this is that usually I consider a purge a drop of the > "data" but in this case there isn't actually any data, it's only metadata. > > I know we are kind of copying the old hive/Iceberg naming here where the > catalog "metadata" was considered independent from the on > disk metadata. So it feels right in that history, I'm just wondering if we > can start using a better vocab to describe what's happening. So I have > no issues with going ahead with this, I hope we can find some better > vocabulary around this since the idea of dropping a view with "purge" > still sounds a bit odd to me. > > So overall a +1, but I think we should consider not even having a "purge" > verb for views with a possibly different behavior than drop. > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 7:24 AM Robert Stupp <sn...@snazy.de> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 6:22 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I propose to add [1] a new feature flag PURGE_VIEWS_ON_DROP to allow > > > dropping views when DROP_WITH_PURGE_ENABLED is false (default). > > > > > > The default value of PURGE_VIEWS_ON_DROP is true to match prior > > behaviour. > > > > > > Any concerns? > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2369 > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Dmitri. > >
