RussellSpitzer commented on PR #17834:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/17834#issuecomment-5440664137

   I'm not sure we want to encourage clients to fall back on some other method 
of determining if the deletes need to apply. My gut response is usually not to 
add redundancies that an implementation can get wrong. I can understand though 
that some implementations perhaps don't have the capability to just apply a 
delete file to a data file, if they have to do the apply logic to apply deletes 
that does sound understandable.
   
   We probably should have a little design chat on this since I know this was 
discussed when the API w as originally proposed ... years ago? At that time it 
was argued not to add that info because, as I noted, it doesn't actually add 
anything to the response. 
   
   I would probably raise a thread on the dev list and add a agenda Item to the 
Catalog sync next week. Any change we do here is a change that any 
implementations of this API also would have to make so it's potentially not as 
cheap as we might like depending on the choices those systems made. (I know 
this is basically the inverse of the problem that Trino and I guess DuckDB have)


-- 
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]

Reply via email to