Hi all,

I'd like to ask for the community's opinion on the appropriate
response status code for table/view rename operations when there is a
conflicting operation in progress.

A PR was recently raised [1], which I believe highlighted the question
of what the correct status code should be in such conflict scenarios.
To me, the Iceberg REST Catalog specification does not clearly address
this case. Neither 409 Conflict nor 503 Service Unavailable seems
entirely appropriate for indicating to the client that the operation
could not be completed due to a conflict and that retrying the
operation may succeed.

I think 409 Conflict might be the better choice, but that would
require a change to the specification. It would also end up serving
two different purposes: a non-retriable scenario, where the target
name is already reserved, and a retriable scenario, where the
operation failed due to a temporary conflict. What do you think?

[1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4646

Thanks,
Nandor

Reply via email to