raghavyadav01 opened a new pull request, #18613:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/18613

   Closes #18608
   
   The configuration page documents `write.delete.isolation-level`, 
`write.update.isolation-level` and `write.merge.isolation-level` without saying 
that they are scoped to row-level operations. Users setting them on 
append-heavy workloads reasonably expect fewer commit conflicts, which makes 
these properties a common wrong turn when diagnosing 409 
`CommitFailedException` responses from a REST catalog.
   
   The reporter's case was 5 tables written by ~30 independent Flink append 
jobs each, at roughly 27 commits per minute per table.
   
   ## Changes
   
   **`docs/docs/configuration.md`** — adds note `[2]`, referenced from the 
three isolation-level rows, following the existing `[1]` convention used by the 
metrics-mode properties:
   
   > Isolation levels apply only to row-level operations: DELETE, UPDATE and 
MERGE. Appends have no isolation level. Concurrent appends are resolved by 
commit retry rather than by a data conflict check, so these properties have no 
effect on append or INSERT.
   
   **`docs/docs/reliability.md`** — adds a paragraph under *Retry validation* 
explaining *why*, so the two pages agree:
   
   > Appends assume nothing about the data already in the table, so a 
conflicting commit never invalidates them and they are always safe to re-apply. 
This is why appends have no isolation level [...]
   
   Docs only; no behaviour change. The three table rows differ from `main` by 
the ` [2]` marker alone — the column boundaries are unchanged.
   


-- 
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]

Reply via email to