BsoBird closed issue #11765: Data loss bug in MergeIntoCommand
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765
--
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 unsubscrib
rdblue commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2557395549
I just left a -1 on the docs PR. I don't think that this is the right place
to put a warning and I also think that the warning is overly broad and would
lead to confusion.
--
Thi
BsoBird commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2542688203
@RussellSpitzer
Sir.If you have time, please review this PR for me. I believe we need to
warn users against doing this in the documentation.
https://github.com/apache/iceberg
RussellSpitzer commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2542309392
> However, sir, I might have discovered some issues. When executing the
COW-MERGE-INTO command, Spark needs to use the ods_table twice. The first time
is to match data
BsoBird commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2541708695
@RussellSpitzer
Sir. I am using Spark version 3.5.1, and the Iceberg version is 1.7.1/1.6.1.
Sql:
```
merge into target_iceberg_table t using
(
select
RussellSpitzer commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2541339227
It would also be very helpful to know how you are determining there is data
loss
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, pl
RussellSpitzer commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2541337509
You'll need to elaborate a bit more. What does "losing some of the increment
new data writes" mean?
Can you give an example? We can't really debug the generic case si
BsoBird commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2540547547
> Shouldn't be any problem i'm aware of. If there are incorrectly applied
merges in that situation it would be the validations at commit time are failing.
Sir, currently it a
sfc-gh-rspitzer commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2540419261
Shouldn't be any problem i'm aware of. If there are incorrectly applied
merges in that situation it would be the validations at commit time are
failing.
--
This is an a
BsoBird commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2540372837
> We don't have auto merge schema so I don't think we have the same issue as
in the Delta issue (at least not yet). Do you have any more details about the
data loss?
Sir, if
RussellSpitzer commented on issue #11765:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/11765#issuecomment-2539320431
We don't have auto merge schema so I don't think we have the same issue as
in the Delta issue (at least not yet). Do you have any more details about the
data loss?
--
Thi
11 matches
Mail list logo
