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 rewrite deletes in case of a manifest only having 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 only aged out deletes will only be rewritten opportunistically if 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