amogh-jahagirdar commented on code in PR #11180: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11180#discussion_r1797165832
########## core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/RESTTable.java: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, + * software distributed under the License is distributed on an + * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY + * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the + * specific language governing permissions and limitations + * under the License. + */ +package org.apache.iceberg; + +import java.util.Map; +import java.util.function.Supplier; +import org.apache.iceberg.catalog.TableIdentifier; +import org.apache.iceberg.metrics.MetricsReporter; +import org.apache.iceberg.rest.RESTClient; +import org.apache.iceberg.rest.ResourcePaths; + +public class RESTTable extends BaseTable { Review Comment: So instead of `RESTTable`, I wonder if it would make sense to add 2 methods to `TableOperations`, 1 called `boolean performRemoteScan()` which defaults to `false` and another called `TableScan remoteScan()` which defaults to throwing an unsupported operation. `RESTTableOperations` would override this to return true based on the conditions for planning mode. Then the implementation of `BaseTable.newScan` would do a `if (ops.performRemoteScan()) {return ops.remoteScan()}` Then `RESTTableOperations` itself can return the scan implementation you currently have, and it has all the context of the client, the headers, etc. We expand the surface area of API of `TableOperations` but again I think for this case it's logically consistent since we are talking about interacting with metadata, or lack thereof by delegating to a server to do that talking. It also has the benefit of making the implementation a bit more flexible so that if some other catalog implementation has some concept like this they're not tied down to REST specific implementations. -- 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
