Skip to content
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

Support LocationProviders like the Java Iceberg Reference Implementaiton #861

Open
corleyma opened this issue Jun 26, 2024 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #1452
Open

Support LocationProviders like the Java Iceberg Reference Implementaiton #861

corleyma opened this issue Jun 26, 2024 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #1452

Comments

@corleyma
Copy link

Feature Request / Improvement

The Iceberg Java API supports customizing where data files are written using LocationProviders. By default, Iceberg writes data files following a Hive schema. However, table properties can be used to switch to using a built-in ObjectStoreLocationProvider that is optimized to maximize throughput on object storage. It's also possible to provide your own custom LocationProviders.

I think for write parity between pyiceberg and Spark, it's important for pyiceberg to at least support the ObjectStoreLocationProvider functionality. Here's the Java implementation, and here's the current logic in pyiceberg which seems to only mimic the default locationprovider.

While AWS S3 has since revised their guidance about the necessity of injecting randomness into prefixes, that guidance still holds for other object stores like GCS, so in addition to being required for parity I think this feature is still important for performance too.

@kevinjqliu
Copy link
Contributor

+1 on adding LocationProviders. It's useful for configuring writes for data files and gives flexibility in writing.
Would be great to make it pluggable just like FileIO

@smaheshwar-pltr
Copy link

I think this is a great idea! Would love to work on this if no one is assigned yet 😄

@Fokko
Copy link
Contributor

Fokko commented Dec 19, 2024

@smaheshwar-pltr I don't think anyone started on this, feel free to pick this up, I'm happy to review!

@smaheshwar-pltr smaheshwar-pltr linked a pull request Dec 20, 2024 that will close this issue
@smaheshwar-pltr
Copy link

Great! I've put up #1452 that should address this

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants