Hi Gabor, It makes sense to me. AFAIK, as the tables creation comes from catalog "controller", they can "decide" the version. So, it would be each catalog to deal with the way/version they want to create tables.
Regards JB On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 11:11 PM Gabor Kaszab <[email protected]> wrote: > > Naively asking, can't we add some property to tell Iceberg which version to > use as default when creating tables? (If there is no such setting currently) > > Gabor > > Jack Ye <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2023. jan. 11., Sze 20:04): >> >> Should we start a community vote on this? >> >> I remember in today's community sync meeting Russell briefly discussed about >> some compaction supports that are not there yet and some users are struggled >> with small delete files issue, and it was to some extent why Spark is still >> defaulting v1. >> >> Regarding feature side, changelog scan is mostly there in Spark, and there >> will also likely be movements on Trino side for it very soon. >> >> Overall, I think it would be beneficial to move default to v2, which could >> incentivize the completion of those missing parts across engines. >> >> Best, >> Jack Ye >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 5:47 AM Piotr Findeisen <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> FWIW Trino already creates v2 tables by default. >>> Thought it's worth sharing for context. >>> >>> Best >>> PF >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:09 AM Manu Zhang <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> We've maintained a forked Iceberg internally and all our use cases involve >>>> v2 tables with row-level updates and deletes. Our users need to remember >>>> to create table with the `'format-version'='2'` option or alter table >>>> afterwards. >>>> >>>> I'm thinking about changing the default format-version of our forked >>>> Iceberg to v2 . Is there any concern for this change? Any hidden issues >>>> I've missed? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Manu
