Hello! I went through the FIP another time as I did not remember doing it already :)
I have additional questions beyond the first 2. Let me paste those here and add: 1. Isn't the scope of the FIP misleading? This FIP seems to be about removing system columns, but it primarily proposes a new read mode named PARTITION_TIMESTAMP. Is this because removing those columns prevents users from accessing data on the lake? If so: - how do user are supposed to do that now - What would change 2. How does this relate to union reads? I am quite new to the community and Fluss. Could you explain how the new PARTITION_TIMESTAMP mode relates to union reads? If the answer is not obvious, perhaps this warrants a section in the FIP. 3. Why *"*Only auto partitioned table is supported in this mode"? Why only for partitions generated by Fluss, and not for any partition that represents a timestamp? On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 4:50 PM Lorenzo Affetti < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello Yuxia! > Thanks for the great FIP! > I have some questions: > > 1. Isn't the scope of the FIP misleading? > It seems this FIP is about removing system columns, but it primarily > proposes a new read mode named PARTITION_TIMESTAMP. > > 2. How does this relate to union reads? > I am quite new to the community and Fluss. Could you explain how the new > PARTITION_TIMESTAMP mode relates to union reads? > If the answer is not obvious, perhaps this warrants a section in the FIP. > > Thank you! > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 8:20 AM yuxia <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, all. >> >> Currently, every Fluss lake table is automatically provisioned with three >> mandatory system columns, __bucket , __offset , __timstamp (intended for >> bucket and offset-based subscription as well as addition informartion >> check). >> While originally designed to allow clients to pinpoint specific data >> offsets of specific buckets, the practical evolution of the ecosystem has >> rendered this default behavior suboptimal for the dowstream since the >> dowstream warehouse or BI tools do not expect these internal metadata >> fields. >> >> >> So, I'd like to propose FIP-27: Remove Mandatory System Columns From >> Fluss Lake Tables [1] to remove the three mandatory system columns while >> still keep compability. >> >> Welcome your feedback and suggestions on this proposal. Looking forward >> to a productive discussion! >> >> [1]: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLUSS/FIP-27%3A+Remove+Mandatory+System+Columns+From+Fluss+Lake+Tables >> >> Best regards, >> Yuxia >> > > > -- > Lorenzo Affetti > Senior Software Engineer @ Flink Team > Ververica <http://www.ververica.com> > -- Lorenzo Affetti Senior Software Engineer @ Flink Team Ververica <http://www.ververica.com>
