-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
[IcebergIO] Add Iceberg SQL table provider and tests #34799
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Checks are failing. Will not request review until checks are succeeding. If you'd like to override that behavior, comment |
+ "LOCATION '" | ||
+ tableIdentifier | ||
+ "' \n" | ||
+ "TBLPROPERTIES '{ \"triggering_frequency_seconds\" : 10 }'"; |
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.
Can I define partition column with transform function for my Iceberg 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.
We don't support creating tables with partition spec right now (tracker #34117)
+ " c_timestamp TIMESTAMP, \n" | ||
+ " c_varchar VARCHAR, \n " | ||
+ " c_char CHAR, \n" | ||
+ " c_arr ARRAY<VARCHAR> \n" |
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.
Could you also add a nested array field such as array<array> and some nested types also ?
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.
Yep will do
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 suggesting this, it pointed out some incorrect conversion logic: #34887
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.
Fixed conversion logic and push a new commit
(lmk if you'd like me to separate it into a different PR)
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #34799 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 54.52% 54.50% -0.03%
- Complexity 1479 1491 +12
============================================
Files 1010 1012 +2
Lines 160465 160407 -58
Branches 1079 1086 +7
============================================
- Hits 87499 87427 -72
- Misses 70861 70873 +12
- Partials 2105 2107 +2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Assigning reviewers: R: @robertwb for label java. Note: If you would like to opt out of this review, comment Available commands:
The PR bot will only process comments in the main thread (not review comments). |
Integrate IcebergIO with Beam SQL