JanKaul commented on code in PR #11041:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11041#discussion_r4121872755


##########
format/view-spec.md:
##########
@@ -160,7 +180,116 @@ Each entry in `version-log` is a struct with the 
following fields:
 | _required_  | `timestamp-ms` | Timestamp when the view's 
`current-version-id` was updated (ms from epoch) |
 | _required_  | `version-id`   | ID that `current-version-id` was set to |
 
-## Appendix A: An Example
+#### Storage Table Identifier
+
+The table identifier for the storage table that stores the precomputed results.
+
+| Requirement | Field name     | Description |
+|-------------|----------------|-------------|
+| _required_  | `namespace`    | A list of strings for namespace levels |
+| _required_  | `name`         | A string specifying the name of the table |
+
+### Storage table metadata
+
+This section describes additional metadata for the storage table that 
supplements the regular table metadata and is required for materialized views.
+The `refresh-state` property is set on the [snapshot 
summary](https://iceberg.apache.org/spec/#snapshots) property of a storage 
table snapshot to provide information about the state of the precomputed data.
+
+| Requirement | Field name      | Description |
+|-------------|-----------------|-------------|
+| _optional_  | `refresh-state` | A [refresh state](#refresh-state) record 
stored as a JSON-encoded string |
+
+#### Freshness
+
+A materialized view is **fresh** when the storage table represents the result 
of the current view query. However, consumers may still decide to consume from 
a stale storage table based on their own policies.
+
+A change to the materialized view's definition produces a new 
`view-version-id`; any storage-table snapshot recorded at a prior 
`view-version-id` is invalid and should not be consumed until refreshed.
+
+#### Refresh state
+
+The refresh state record captures the state of dependencies that the producer 
chose to track from the materialized view's dependency graph. A dependency is 
recorded in `source-states` as either a `table` entry (a source table or an 
source materialized view's storage table) and/or a `view` entry. Source 
materialized views can be stored as a `view` and a `table` entry.
+
+The refresh state has the following fields:
+
+| Requirement | Field name                   | Description |
+|-------------|------------------------------|-------------|
+| _required_  | `view-version-id`            | The `version-id` of the 
materialized view when the refresh operation was performed |
+| _required_  | `source-states`              | A list of [source 
state](#source-state) records capturing the dependencies the producer chose to 
track; may be empty |
+| _required_  | `refresh-start-timestamp-ms` | A timestamp of when the refresh 
operation was started |
+
+##### Producer: Recording Refresh State
+
+Producers may selectively choose a subset of their dependencies to record — 
for example, skipping non-Iceberg sources or recording an empty list. See 
[Appendix B](#appendix-b-what-counts-as-a-dependency) for strategies on how to 
store dependency state.
+
+When writing the refresh state, producers:
+
+* **Must** record `view-version-id` and `refresh-start-timestamp-ms`.
+* **Should** include all distinct source states for the inputs they chose to 
track if they are reachable through multiple paths in the dependency graph.
+* **May** leave `source-states` empty (e.g., when sources are non-Iceberg or 
freshness is determined by a mechanism outside this spec).

Review Comment:
   In the syncs we reached consensus on the wording: "Producers may selectively 
choose a subset of their dependencies to record". We've spend a lot of time 
discussing the usage of dependencies or other similar terms.
   
   Additionally, we've talked about including the "diamond pattern" and special 
cases when there are actually different versions being referenced indirectly. 
All of that lead to the inclusion of the point: **Should** include all distinct 
...
   
   Generally, I would like to try to stick to the formulation of sections on 
which we've spent considerable effort on to reach consensus. Especially, since 
someone else might want the diamond pattern to be included.



-- 
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