amogh-jahagirdar commented on code in PR #10962:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/10962#discussion_r1862410733
##########
core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/MergingSnapshotProducer.java:
##########
@@ -833,7 +833,17 @@ public List<ManifestFile> apply(TableMetadata base,
Snapshot snapshot) {
filterManager.filterManifests(
SnapshotUtil.schemaFor(base, targetBranch()),
snapshot != null ? snapshot.dataManifests(ops.io()) : null);
- long minDataSequenceNumber =
+
+ long minNewFileSequenceNumber =
Review Comment:
Took a look, @jasonf20 see my comment
[here](https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11131/files#r1815710103) , the
change to not ropportunistically rewrite deletes in case of aged out deletes
was actually intentional and I don't think we want to add that behavior back.
Let me take a look to see how we can simplify the tests in this PR considering
that manifests with aged out deletes won't be rewritten opportunistically until
some other changes prompt a rewrite of the manifest
--
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
