github-actions[bot] commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-2367035445
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has been open
for 180 days with no activity. It will be closed in next 14 days if no further
activity oc
Fokko commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1971024124
@syun64 Yes, that sounds like a great suggestion to me. I think it makes a
lot of sense to create a table including a snapshot. I'm not sure if
`as_select` is the best name since
syun64 commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1959949307
There's a PR in progress that will introduce 'REPLACE TABLE' support, but I
don't think we've come to a consensus yet on how we would want to support 'AS
SELECT' semantics in PyI
syun64 commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1905187291
Hi @Fokko - sounds like you beat me to it 😄 Please let me know if you need
any additional heavy lifting on #284 . Happy to help as always.
The reason I was curious if there
Fokko commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1904323323
@syun64 I started on #284 today. It re-uses the `UpdateSchema` API which
already sets the right IDs, and maintains IDs for the existing fields. I don't
think that doesn't help us
syun64 commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1904310699
In order to reduce duplication of code, would it make sense to combine the
job of
[TypeUtil.assignFreshIds](https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/main/api/src/main/java/org/apac
syun64 commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1901289940
Makes sense @Fokko . Thank you very much for taking the time to lay all
these options where a user may have to handle compatible or incompatible schema
updates.
As you sug
syun64 commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1901252873
Makes sense @Fokko . Thank you very much for taking the time to lay all
these options out for the cases where a user may have to handle schema updates.
As you suggested, I
Fokko commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1901165986
> Evolving schema would be nice, also would it be possible to evolve
partitions? e.g. after a specific overwrite I want to have schema evolution and
possibility to replace the tab
syun64 commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1900741649
Thank you for the great points @Fokko and @nicor88 .
Just like @nicor88 mentioned, I think RTAS will be slightly different from
overwrite in the sense that the schema, the
nicor88 commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1900185062
> The next step would be to automatically evolve the schema as well (with
flags for compatible/incompatible changes).
@Fokko evolving schema would be nice, also would it be po
Fokko commented on issue #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/issues/281#issuecomment-1900076148
@syun64 thanks for raising this. With the freshly merged write support, we
can do:
```python
cat = load_catalog('default')
tbl = cat.load_table('default.some_table')
12 matches
Mail list logo
