Hi all, Another angle to consider: afaict we don't do any integration test for any of the sinks (JDBC or CloudWatch) – only unit tests. This means that more complex issues may have gone unnoticed so far. Adding a few Quarkus or IT tests for both sinks would significantly increase our confidence in their reliability.
Thanks, Alex On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 5:54 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > I’m in favor of indication in the release notes, that’s important. > Beta, preview, “can be change”, … I don’t have a strong opinion about the > wording, but agree on the purpose. > > Regards > JB > > Le ven. 24 oct. 2025 à 18:38, Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > > Hi All, > > > > I'm starting this thread to consolidate the various discussions and reach > > consensus about flagging events as "beta" in 1.2.0. > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2877 > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/1wwr0wmt88rxrp0n0k0bgmjpls14tcgn > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/wso9sv9s36wv8rcd2ol7rwq1d1mmt4f4 > > > > TL;DR: > > > > * AFAIK 1.2.0 is the first release where events are available. > > * The JDBC schema for events is very likely to change after 1.2.0 in a > > non-backward compatible way. > > * Java class are very likely to change too > > > > To recap: I propose flagging the whole events feature as "beta" in 1.2.0 > > and specifically adding release notes that the JDBC schema will change and > > old events data will NOT be readable (i.e. dropped) after upgrading to the > > next release. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Thanks, > > Dmitri. > >
