amogh-jahagirdar commented on code in PR #14341: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/14341#discussion_r2441374660
########## api/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/actions/RepairManifests.java: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ +/* + * 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.actions; + +import org.apache.iceberg.ManifestFile; + +/** An action that will repair manifests. Implementations should produce a new set of manifests. */ +public interface RepairManifests extends SnapshotUpdate<RepairManifests, RepairManifests.Result> { + + /** + * Configuration method for repairing manifest entry statistics + * + * @return this for method chaining + */ + RepairManifests repairEntryStats(); + + /** + * Configuration method for removing duplicate file entries and removing files which no longer + * exist in storage Review Comment: I covered missing files in my reply above but for duplicates, the same principle applies there. We know that duplicate entries is a problem; no client ever intends to do that, it just happens (zombies in KC etc) due to cases we don't handle yet. Even thoguh the table is still readable, we know it's a correctness issue in this case because scan planning would return the files twice. We could maybe address this in the implementation in scan planning, but this is just more state that'd need to be retained in nodes doing planning, and it still really just masks the issue for other implementations. So I think the right solution here is also to just fix up the manifest and report to the user. -- 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: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
