pvary commented on a change in pull request #2691:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/2691#discussion_r649005476
##########
File path: core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/BaseUpdatePartitionSpec.java
##########
@@ -223,7 +223,9 @@ public PartitionSpec apply() {
// field IDs were not required for v1 and were assigned sequentially
in each partition spec starting at 1,000.
// to maintain consistent field ids across partition specs in v1
tables, any partition field that is removed
// must be replaced with a null transform. null values are always
allowed in partition data.
- builder.add(field.sourceId(), field.fieldId(), field.name(),
Transforms.alwaysNull());
+ // To avoid name conflict when add and remove same partition transform
multiple times, field name will be
+ // replaced by field name append with field id.
+ builder.add(field.sourceId(), field.fieldId(), field.name() + "_" +
field.fieldId(), Transforms.alwaysNull());
Review comment:
I am not an expert with this part of the code, but the comment states:
`field IDs were not required for v1`
Could we end up with the same `field.name() + "_" + null` if the above
happens?
Maybe it would be better to add a random generated UUID instead to avoid any
chance of conflicts.
--
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.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
