amogh-jahagirdar commented on code in PR #9298:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/9298#discussion_r1428998565
##########
spark/v3.5/spark/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/spark/Spark3Util.java:
##########
@@ -948,6 +950,17 @@ public static
org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.TableIdentifier toV1TableIdentifier(
return org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.TableIdentifier.apply(table,
database);
}
+ static String tableUUID(org.apache.iceberg.Table table) {
+ if (table instanceof HasTableOperations) {
Review Comment:
Sure, I'd check out that logic further and we can see what the right
behavior is here. I still think the change that was made in #9310 is definitely
the right fix from an API perspective (even if we decide not to use that API
here). The main issue that was solved there was semantically the metadata table
UUID should be the same for the same reference.
In other words, imo I would not change the UUID API semantics to fit
whatever the caching logic relies on.
If we need the base table UUID for the caching logic, then maybe
`MetadataTable` specifically can expose another API for exposing the underlying
base table's UUID. Or alternatively keep it as is, and just expose the
underlying Table (but that seems to expose too much imo).
--
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: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@iceberg.apache.org
