guykhazma commented on code in PR #12228:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12228#discussion_r2036041469
##########
core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/BaseMetastoreCatalog.java:
##########
@@ -71,23 +70,35 @@ public Table loadTable(TableIdentifier identifier) {
}
@Override
- public Table registerTable(TableIdentifier identifier, String
metadataFileLocation) {
+ public Table registerTable(
+ TableIdentifier identifier, String metadataFileLocation, boolean
overwrite) {
Preconditions.checkArgument(
identifier != null && isValidIdentifier(identifier), "Invalid
identifier: %s", identifier);
Preconditions.checkArgument(
metadataFileLocation != null && !metadataFileLocation.isEmpty(),
"Cannot register an empty metadata file location as a table");
- // Throw an exception if this table already exists in the catalog.
- if (tableExists(identifier)) {
+ // If the table already exists and overwriting is disabled, throw an
exception.
+ if (tableExists(identifier) && !overwrite) {
throw new AlreadyExistsException("Table already exists: %s", identifier);
}
TableOperations ops = newTableOps(identifier);
- InputFile metadataFile = ops.io().newInputFile(metadataFileLocation);
- TableMetadata metadata = TableMetadataParser.read(ops.io(), metadataFile);
- ops.commit(null, metadata);
-
+ TableMetadata newMetadata =
+ TableMetadataParser.read(ops.io(),
ops.io().newInputFile(metadataFileLocation));
+
+ TableMetadata existing = ops.current();
+ if (existing != null && overwrite) {
+ if (existing.metadataFileLocation().equals(metadataFileLocation)) {
+ LOG.info(
+ "The requested metadata matches the existing metadata. No changes
will be committed.");
+ return new BaseTable(ops, fullTableName(name(), identifier),
metricsReporter());
+ }
+ dropTable(identifier, false /* Keep all data and metadata files */);
Review Comment:
I also agree that atomic swap is the behaviour I would expect as leaving an
intermediate stage is problematic.
I have some questions/suggestions:
1. What is the semantics expected from the REST API perspective? does it
expect the operation to succeed atomically? I haven't found information in the
documentation about that.
2. If the semantics are not something which are expected by the REST API
then shouldn't this be left to the specific implementation of the catalog and
then some will be able provide the atomic swap?
3. I would also like to bring for discussion an alternative approach -
instead of dropping and then re-registering we can enable registering multiple
location and have the reader access them by their commit order.
This way we can first do the register with the new metadatafile and only
then do the drop of the old metadata file (it will technically not be a drop
anymore but more like a cleanup).
curious to hear your thoughts.
--
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
