I'm fine with the change overall. However, I think falling back to the default credentials when given a storage name that doesn't exist is a big no-no. Personally, I think it's a big enough deal that I put a -1 on the change until that's fixed. Please feel free to tell me why I'm wrong here.
Mike On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 7:28 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > > Tornike proposed an enhancement in [3409] for S3 use cases. Notable > changes: > > * Polaris owners can configure multiple base credentials for S3 access. > > * Each Storage Configuration has a name that can be set via the Management > API and used to map to specific base credentials (essentially an N:N > mapping). > > * New functionality is protected by a usual feature flag and other config > settings. > > I believe it is a valuable enhancement and is worth merging. > > Some adjustments may be necessary later depending on how the table-level > storage configuration proposal develops, but this change is much simpler, > yet effective for users who own their Polaris servers. > > [3409] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3409 > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Dmitri. >
