ForeverAngry commented on issue #2604: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/2604#issuecomment-3395311657
I dont disagree there is a difference between JAVA and how pyiceberg handles the actual data files on the object store. My perspective was that not dealing with the actual file objects during the expiration process, was a feature rather than an oversight or deficiency. In my data lake, we deal with a good amount of transactions, so I prefer to have the table not "locked-up" so to speak, as much as possible. That being said, i dont think its a big lift to add an capability to delete data files, or not. I think it would be a good argument we could pass the maintenance constructor, or maybe a table property?? (though i know that might not be part of the spec, and not the best approach, id need to take a look). @Anton-Tarazi thoughts? -- 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]
