Hi all,

Yes Oleg, that's a good point out - at that time I hadn't questioned the
role that the *CommitTableEvents play while looking into the transaction
bugs that had been reported. This recommendation is 100% influenced by my
findings on that side of things :)

> Are there any that are not covered by existing events?
The CommitTransaction API is a bit odd in this manner - today it only
generates the (Before/After)CommitTransaction events. So while a user may
have updated one/multiple tables(s) as part of the transaction, there is
not a specific *UpdateTableEvent that is generated. To maintain parity and
specificity while removing the *CommitTableEvents, I will work on
generating the necessary *UpdateTableEvent for changes made during a
transaction.

Best,
Adnan Hemani

On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 3:58 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 on the removal. Here are the reasons: they are not used anywhere AFAIK,
> and there are replacements(*UpdateTableEvent, *RegisterTableEvent) with
> more consistent names.
>
> Yufei
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 6:11 AM Oleg Soloviov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Adnan,
> >
> > I was planning to use them since you mentioned you were not going to
> delete
> > it on Polaris slack channel :)
> > But I do not mind removing them, if it helps to keep Events API more
> clear
> > and concise, especially in the context of multiple table commit
> scenarios.
> >
> > > Most of the APIs that the commit events were signaling now have their
> own
> > instrumented events (such as `UpdateTable`)
> > Are there any that are not covered by existing events?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Oleg
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 9:57 PM Adnan Hemani via dev <
> > [email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I wanted to gauge the community's thoughts on removing
> > > (Before/After)CommitTableEvent altogether. Most of the APIs that the
> > commit
> > > events were signaling now have their own instrumented events (such as
> > > `UpdateTable`). Does anyone still have a use of the commit events on
> > their
> > > own then?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Adnan Hemani
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to