pvary commented on code in PR #6570:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/6570#discussion_r1161328364


##########
hive-metastore/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/hive/HiveTableOperations.java:
##########
@@ -572,8 +595,39 @@ private static boolean hiveEngineEnabled(TableMetadata 
metadata, Configuration c
         ConfigProperties.ENGINE_HIVE_ENABLED, 
TableProperties.ENGINE_HIVE_ENABLED_DEFAULT);
   }
 
+  /**
+   * Returns if the hive locking should be enabled on the table, or not.
+   *
+   * <p>The decision is made like this:
+   *
+   * <ol>
+   *   <li>Table property value {@link TableProperties#HIVE_LOCK_ENABLED}
+   *   <li>If the table property is not set then check the hive-site.xml 
property value {@link
+   *       ConfigProperties#LOCK_HIVE_ENABLED}
+   *   <li>If none of the above is enabled then use the default value {@link
+   *       TableProperties#HIVE_LOCK_ENABLED_DEFAULT}
+   * </ol>
+   *
+   * @param metadata Table metadata to use
+   * @param conf The hive configuration to use
+   * @return if the hive engine related values should be enabled or not
+   */
+  private static boolean hiveLockEnabled(TableMetadata metadata, Configuration 
conf) {

Review Comment:
   My thinking was somewhat different. 
   I expect that we should highlight in the documentation the possible issues, 
and then with the configuration provide flexibility to use it correctly.
   
   I expect that if someone does the effort of backporting the required 
changes, then they have one of the following:
   1. They control everything and migrate with a big boom
   2. Few problematic tables which they need to write without locks, but they 
do not want to touch the other tables.
   3. They have a few tables which are written by old clients and most of the 
tables will be written by new clients
   
   In the case of 2/3 there might be a situation where a particular client 
would like to write one table with locks and one table without locks, but there 
is a general rule which most of the clients would like to adhere.
   
   Do I overcomplicate things? If we do not expect this kind of situation, then 
I would prefer a simpler/table level conf.
   
   What do you think?
   Thanks, Peter 



-- 
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