szehon-ho commented on PR #11041: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/11041#issuecomment-2543646586
> > If i understand correctly @wmoustafa comment on the mailing list, then there is some ambiguity here for what to put, if the same table in expressed in the various forms (catalog.database.name) or (database.name) or (name), either in same sql statement or in the different sql representations of the same view. > > I am still -1 on this change before resolving #11365. Further, I am also -1 on referencing table identifiers in table snapshot summary. We had extended discussions on this and converged at some point already. This is from the discussion in https://lists.apache.org/thread/v8m1tpb91g740gmvqyphhjw37mpr8sl7 right? if i understand the discussion, it is good to clarify the existing assumptions that allow portability of all views (not just MV), I'm also +1 on adding the idea of #11365, but it seems most opinions there was that it should not block MV spec. -- 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
