syun64 closed issue #278: Create Iceberg Table from pyarrow Schema with no IDs
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278
--
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 co
syun64 commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1910272795
> @syun64 Yes that sounds like a reasonable proposal to me. On thing to
mention. We would also like to use PyIceberg without Arrow, and we can do this
by making the type annotati
Fokko commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1910270303
@syun64 Yes that sounds like a reasonable proposal to me. On thing to
mention. We would also like to use PyIceberg without Arrow, and we can do this
by making the type annotation
syun64 commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1906647358
That makes sense @Fokko .
Just to make sure we are on the same page, does the following approach align
with your thoughts?
We are proposing to update the create_tabl
Fokko commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1906620668
Alright, I went to the source and talked with @danielcweeks and @rdblue. It
looks like we made things more complicated than actually needed.
So when reading and writing Parq
anupam-saini commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1904757960
Hello, I would like to put up a PR as per the discussion above if no one has
started working already. Please let me know if this is fine. Also, @syun64 and
I work together
syun64 commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1904289015
> what do we do with the name-mapping created in step 1 after the table is
created? Do we just discard it or put it in schema.name-mapping.default? If the
later, I think we need
HonahX commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1902557930
Thanks for summarizing the approaches and explanation on the concerns.
> I’m not convinced that we can assign ids without relying on the position
when generating the name
syun64 commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1900574539
That sounds good @Fokko
I think having a _CreateMappingFromPyArrowSchma preorder visitor does a good
job of separating out the two concerns above.
> I think the ou
Fokko commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1900388501
What do you think of the following approach:
> I think the problem here is that we don't have an API like in Spark where
we can [nicely hide
things](https://github.com/apac
syun64 commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1900264983
Thank you for adding the context @Fokko :)
Just so that we make sure new readers aren’t confused, do you think it’s
fair to say that we are talking about ‘assigning fresh I
Fokko commented on issue #278:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/278#issuecomment-1899892752
To add some more context. As also mentioned in the earlier conversation, I
don't think assigning fresh IDs is safe:
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/pull/219#discussion_r1
12 matches
Mail list logo
