LiebingYu commented on issue #1952: URL: https://github.com/apache/fluss/issues/1952#issuecomment-3509530917
> > [@luoyuxia](https://github.com/luoyuxia) I can take this. Let's briefly align on the solution first. My idea is to add a `lakeDatabase` field to `DatabaseRegistration`, so that when a user creates a Fluss database, they can specify the corresponding data lake database themselves. > > public class DatabaseDescriptor { > > ``` > > private final String lakeDatabase; > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > Another choise is add this `lakeDatabase` to `customProperties`, but this solution need a lot of specific processing when alter database properties. What your opinion? > > I think it's reasable to set in database level since it can simplify user's operation. And we can still allow users to specific the lake database per-table in the future if we found some time users want to map different table in same fluss database to different lake database. > > One question is that what will happen when user alter database to set another lakeDatabase? Or, if users already have some tables with lake enabled in this database, but some day it want to alter the database to set lakeDatabase. What will happen for the existing tables with lake enabled? IMO, If user want to change the `lakeDatabase`: 1. If there are no tables with lake enabled in this database, it can be changed. 2. If there are some tables with lake enable in this database, currently, we can simply forbidden user from changing it. After we support per-table mapping in the future, when change the `lakeDatabase`, we can firstly map the existing lake enable table by table, then change the `lakeDatabase`. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
