kevinjqliu opened a new issue, #13833: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/13833
### Feature Request / Improvement ### Description Iceberg validates conflicts between schema field names and partition field names when adding a partition field. For example, in [`checkAndAddPartitionName`](https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/4dbc7f578eee7ceb9def35ebfa1a4cc236fb598f/api/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/PartitionSpec.java#L392-L416), conflicts are rejected unless it’s an identity/void transform sourced from the same field. However, the same validation is missing during schema evolution. If a user later adds or renames a schema column to the same name as a partition field, the conflict is not detected. This creates ambiguity and may cause incorrect behavior at query or planning time. We should add a similar check when adding a new column to the table schema ([`SchemaUpdate`](https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/4dbc7f578eee7ceb9def35ebfa1a4cc236fb598f/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/SchemaUpdate.java#L48)) Found this edge case while we were implementing the same check in pyiceberg, https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/pull/2305 ### Query engine None ### Willingness to contribute - [ ] I can contribute this improvement/feature independently - [ ] I would be willing to contribute this improvement/feature with guidance from the Iceberg community - [x] I cannot contribute this improvement/feature at this time -- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
