singhpk234 commented on code in PR #2714:
URL: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2714#discussion_r2395108455
##########
runtime/service/src/main/java/org/apache/polaris/service/config/ProductionReadinessChecks.java:
##########
@@ -302,4 +302,36 @@ public ProductionReadinessCheck
checkInsecureStorageSettings(
? ProductionReadinessCheck.OK
: ProductionReadinessCheck.of(errors.toArray(new Error[0]));
}
+
+ @Produces
+ public ProductionReadinessCheck checkOverlappingSiblingCheckSettings(
+ FeaturesConfiguration featureConfiguration) {
+ var optimizedSiblingCheck = FeatureConfiguration.OPTIMIZED_SIBLING_CHECK;
+ var errors = new ArrayList<Error>();
+ if
(Boolean.parseBoolean(featureConfiguration.defaults().get(optimizedSiblingCheck.key())))
{
Review Comment:
> If we did it in the JDBC persistence, would it be easier to access schema
details
ACK
> I'd suggest checking for the some values in the new columns and assuming
the values are correct if present
This would, still not guarantee, that backfill was done correctly for
example a user went to v2 from v1 added the column to the entities table, now
its create a table for that table we populated the `location_without_schema`
but now for the subsequent table thats created under the namespace, we still
doesn't have enough info if all the tables in the namespace have populated the
value ? hence cutting this config entirely, if its helpful i can add a config
to bypass this readiness check ?
--
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]
