Re: [DISCUSS] Iceberg REST FGAC OpenAPI proposal

Thanks, Prashant! I agree, it's good to have a starting point we can iterate from. On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 3:25 PM Yufei Gu wrote: > Thanks Prashant for filing the PR. This is a solid start point for FGAC! > > The spec changes are straightforward and leave plenty of room for future > extensibili

Re: [DISCUSS] Iceberg REST FGAC OpenAPI proposal

Thanks Prashant for filing the PR. This is a solid start point for FGAC! The spec changes are straightforward and leave plenty of room for future extensibility. While the current Transform [1] isn’t quite sufficient for column masking, enhancements to Transform along with the upcoming UDF proposal

Re: [DISCUSS] Iceberg REST FGAC OpenAPI proposal

Robert, > It might not change this particular proposal > having support for UDFs in Iceberg Expressions, which is a prerequisite for this particular proposal Unfortunately, that's not my understanding of what community consensus was based on community sync (here

Re: [QUESTION] What type promotion actually means

I think I'm going to disagree and argue that it's not really a gray area. Having strict schema evolution rules and how schema's are tracked means that there is independence between writer and reader schemas which remain compatible due to the evolution rules. This means that you can have writers u

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecation of Position Deletes with Row Data

Ah! That I support. Thanks for Clarifying Peter On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 1:08 PM Péter Váry wrote: > Let me clarify the proposal: > > The Position Deletes With Row (PDWR) feature, introduced in the V2 Iceberg > specification, has been deprecated in the V3 spec. It remains implemented > in the cur

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecation of Position Deletes with Row Data

Let me clarify the proposal: The Position Deletes With Row (PDWR) feature, introduced in the V2 Iceberg specification, has been deprecated in the V3 spec. It remains implemented in the current Java version of the Parquet/Avro/ORC writers and is accessible via the FileAppenderFactory and FileWriter

Re: [DISCUSS][SPEC] Add loaded-via in loadTable Request to support Definer Views

I think that ownership should be managed by the catalog and should not be set by table properties. Respecting an "owner" property would easily lead to security issues where writers can change the property with write access. I think ownership or what role is the definer, like other security attribut

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecation of Position Deletes with Row Data

I think it makes sense to deprecate any APIs which end up writing position deletes with row values. I'm not sure how much it's worth from a spec perspective to go and mark that field as deprecated. I'm not opposed to it since it does clearly indicate the community stance, but since subsequent forma

Re: [DISCUSS] v4 - Improved column statistics

Hey everyone, We met yesterday and talked about some details around the stats proposal. Please find the notes here and the recording here

Re: [DISCUSS] Iceberg REST FGAC OpenAPI proposal

Prashant, be ensured that we are still and actively working into this. We are looking at this from multiple points of specific views but most importantly from a high level view: how all the things work seamlessly together. We are really looking forward to providing an update as soon as we are conf