+1 Great proposal. What about moving the timeline one release ahead? There isn't any more planned work for IcebergSink between the 1.10.0 and the 1.11.0 release. IcebergSink already got enough exposure and we won't gain anything from waiting longer to make it the default. Thus, I would suggest to already deprecate FlinkSink in Iceberg 1.10.0 and promote IcebergSink to be the default implementation. Users will have the option to switch back to the old sink anytime via the configuration option Rodrigo mentioned. If there are no issues, we can proceed to remove FlinkSink in Iceberg 1.11.0.
What do you think? Cheers, Max On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 10:15 PM Péter Váry <peter.vary.apa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 > > On Mon, Jun 23, 2025, 22:04 Őrhidi Mátyás <matyas.orh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> +1, sounds reasonable to me >> >> Thanks, >> Matyas >> >> On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 11:28 AM Rodrigo Meneses <rmene...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi devs, >>> >>> >>> I’d like to start a discussion about the current and future state of our >>> Flink Sink Connectors. >>> >>> >>> As it stands today, we currently have 3 sink implementations: >>> >>> FlinkSink [1] >>> IcebergSink [2] >>> DynamicSink [3] >>> >>> >>> FlinkSink [1] is the current and default implementation of the Flink Sink >>> Connector. >>> >>> >>> IcebergSink [2] is another implementation of the Flink Sink Connector which >>> was introduced in https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/10179. It >>> leverages the latest SinkV2 interfaces in Flink, and it offers the >>> possibility of adding cleanup tasks by the way of implementing the >>> `PostCommitTopology` interface. There is already some work in progress to >>> enable this functionality: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12979 >>> >>> >>> DynamicSink [3] has been recently contributed in >>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/13304 and it can be used to write to >>> any number of tables, dynamically creating and updating tables and >>> dynamically updating the schema and partition spec of tables. >>> >>> >>> Currently, `IcebergSink` is marked as `@Experimental` and it already offers >>> feature parity with `FlinkSink` (the missing RANGE distribution was >>> recently merged https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12071). >>> >>> >>> With https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11244, users have the choice of >>> specifying which Sink Implementation ([1] or [2]) they want to use for >>> Flink SQL. >>> >>> >>> With all this said, we’re proposing the following for Iceberg 1.11: >>> >>> @Deprecate FlinkSink >>> Promote IcebergSink from @Experimental to @PublicEvolving >>> Make IcebergSink the default implementation in Flink SQL. >>> >>> >>> Then in Iceberg 1.12 we will: >>> >>> >>> Remove the `FlinkSink` implementation. >>> Remove @PublicEvolving from IcebergSink >>> >>> >>> What do you think about this plan? >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Rodrigo >>> >>>
