-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 343
feat(catalog): Implement update_table for MemoryCatalog
#1549
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Signed-off-by: CTTY <[email protected]> DerGut <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @CTTY for this pr! Generally looks good, but I would suggest to move the refactoring of MetadataLocation to a separate pr.
| .metadata() | ||
| .write_to( | ||
| staged_table.file_io(), | ||
| staged_table.metadata_location().unwrap(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should not panic here. Also I think we should generate a new table metadata location?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The new metadata location would be generated in TableCommit::apply and attached to the staged table
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The mod name utils is too generic. We should rename it to metadata_location or sth more meaningful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also I would suggest to move this into a separate pr.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How about we only move the usages of MetadataLocation in catalogs other than MemoryCatalog to a different PR, and have MemoryCatalog switch to use MetadataLocation in this PR?
Because we need to use MetadataLocation::with_next_version to bump metadata location version when updating a table, and it would require some cumbersome + temporary logic if without MetadataLocation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have removed MetadataLocation usages for catalogs other than MemoryCatalog
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I still prefer to move it to another pr, but I don't have a strong opinion on it. Currently changes also looks good to me.
Co-authored-by: Renjie Liu <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Renjie Liu <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for taking this back on! I only found some minor issues around comments. Looks good to me otherwise 👏
|
We have just one minor change to resolve. |
Co-authored-by: Jannik Steinmann <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jannik Steinmann <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Renjie Liu <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @CTTY for this pr, LGTM!
Which issue does this PR close?
What changes are included in this PR?
update_tableforMemoryCatalogupdate_tableimpl from feat(catalog): Implement MemoryCatalog's table update/ commit path #1405MetadataLocationParserMetadataLocationParserfor multiple catalogs, and remove the previous metadata location generatorTableCommit::applythat causes it not updatingMetadataLogAre these changes tested?
Added unit tests