aokolnychyi commented on a change in pull request #3199:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/3199#discussion_r718944053
##########
File path: core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/BaseOverwriteFiles.java
##########
@@ -127,8 +147,29 @@ protected void validate(TableMetadata base) {
}
}
- if (conflictDetectionFilter != null && base.currentSnapshot() != null) {
- validateAddedDataFiles(base, startingSnapshotId,
conflictDetectionFilter, caseSensitive);
+
+ if (validateNewDataFiles && base.currentSnapshot() != null) {
+ validateAddedDataFiles(base, startingSnapshotId,
conflictDetectionFilter(), caseSensitive);
+ }
+
+ if (validateNewDeleteFiles && base.currentSnapshot() != null) {
+ if (rowFilter() != Expressions.alwaysFalse()) {
+ validateNoNewDeleteFiles(base, startingSnapshotId,
conflictDetectionFilter(), caseSensitive);
+ } else if (deletedDataFiles.size() > 0) {
Review comment:
I interpret it like this: call `validateNoNewDeletesForDataFiles` iff we
replace only individual files as it more precise than checking if there are any
deletes matching the filter. Call `validateNewDeleteFiles` in all other cases
(like there are both individual files replaced and the overwrite filter is
set). When calling `validateNewDeleteFiles`, we can use `rowFilter()` as the
conflict detection iff we don't replace any individual files (i.e.
`deletedDataFiles.isEmpty()`).
In my view, `validateNoNewDeleteFiles` is a stronger guarantee than
`validateNoNewDeletesForDataFiles`.
--
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]
