adnanhemani commented on issue #3209: URL: https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/3209#issuecomment-3720905865
Hi @rishii-19-works, so sorry - I missed this thread and just saw it in my notifications. > Would you prefer using some kind of per-request context to store this metadata, or is there already any internal pattern in Polaris to pass such info between layers? I know we have used some sort of per-request context container in the past for something similar. But I haven't had much luck getting it to work for this use case. Maybe something to investigate. > Are there any architectural constraints regarding Quarkus internals vs Polaris/Iceberg logic that I should keep in mind? None that come to mind. We are okay with using Quarkus-provided functionality to solve this issue. > For the first PR, should I only focus on adding the mechanism for storing/passing this intermediate data, or also update a specific flow to show how it would work? IMO it would be best to add one simple, sample flow to show how it work work as part of the first PR. But that's just my opinion, I don't think there is any hard or fast rule on this. -- 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]
