Dmitri, thanks for raising this. I think this relates to the multi-datasource issue I filed a while back: https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/3890. I think we still need to answer questions in that issue.
A side note: we don't know whether the idempotency table and metrics tables are needed long-term. I am leaning toward them not necessarily being there. Yufei On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 4:59 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > > I'm starting this thread to consolidate the discussion about maintaining > the JDBC schema for new features. > > As we have an influx of proposals that include JDBC persistence components > (Idempotency, Open Lineage, Metrics, Events), I think it is time to review > our approach to schema maintenance. > > I'd like to propose keeping separate DDL scripts for each Persistence SPI > with a JDBC backend. That is, one script for the MetaStore > (BasePersistence), one for Lineage, etc. > > The benefits are: > > * Users that opt in to certain features need to keep track only of the > relevant tables. > > * While a feature is in beta/experimental/WIP state, edits to its section > of the DDL do not affect other features. > > * Schema evolution can progress at different paces per feature. Different > evolution paces are a reality we must face anyway. Separating DDL scripts > should make maintenance easier, though. > > Granted, this will require some related and potentially intrusive changes > in the Admin Tool and the bootstrap process. However, I believe they are > well worth the benefits. > > I am willing to make a POC PR for an in-depth review if the community > accepts this idea at the high level. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Dmitri. >
