Re: [PR] Consider moving to ParallelIterable in Deletes::toPositionIndex [iceberg]

2023-11-05 Thread via GitHub
rdblue closed pull request #6432: Consider moving to ParallelIterable in Deletes::toPositionIndex URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/6432 -- 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 th

Re: [PR] Consider moving to ParallelIterable in Deletes::toPositionIndex [iceberg]

2023-11-05 Thread via GitHub
rdblue commented on PR #6432: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/6432#issuecomment-1793809960 #8805 was merged so I'll close this. I should also note that @aokolnychyi raised some concerns about this approach instead of a more comprehensive fix. This is probably a good start if we

Re: [PR] Consider moving to ParallelIterable in Deletes::toPositionIndex [iceberg]

2023-10-11 Thread via GitHub
aokolnychyi commented on PR #6432: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/6432#issuecomment-1758777424 I think we should use a thread pool but I think the implementation should be changed a bit. I explain [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1M4L6o-qnGRwGhbhkW8BnravoTwvCrJV8VvzVQD