gravitino
gravitino copied to clipboard
[#2738] feat(catalog-lakehouse-paimon): support PaimonCatalog implementation to manage Paimon table operations
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Introduce baseline implementation of PaimonCatalog
to manage Paimon table operations.
Why are the changes needed?
Support PaimonCatalog
implementation to provide Gravitino catalog for Paimon table operation management.
Fix: #2738
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Introduce PaimonCatalog
, PaimonCatalogOperations
and PaimonTableOps
as implementation of a Paimon catalog in Gravitino.
How was this patch tested?
-
TestPaimonTableOps
-
TestCatalogUtils
-
TestTableOpsUtils
-
TestTypeUtils
-
TestPaimonConfig
Overal LGTM, except minor comments
@SteNicholas , as Gravitino 0.5 is planned to be released at 4.19, only contains Paimon skeleton code seems not too much benefit to end users, I prefer to delay the merge after 0.5 is released, WDYT?
@FANNG1, make sense to me. I will push other pull requests of Paimon catalog based on this pull request and compared with this pull request. WDYT?
@FANNG1, make sense to me. I will push other pull requests of Paimon catalog based on this pull request and compared with this pull request. WDYT?
ok
@FANNG1, @qqqttt123, I have addressed above comment. PTAL.
LGTM. Prepared for 0.6. After 0.5 branch is created, we will merge this pull request.
@SteNicholas thanks for your work, could you split into smaller PR? like:
- code skeleton
- integrate test skeleton
- schema operations
- basic table operations
- more advanced features like partition, distribution,alterTable etc.
@FANNG1, IMO, splitting this pull request have certain works. Could this pull request take a review firstly?
@FANNG1, IMO, splitting this pull request have certain works. Could this pull request take a review firstly?
sure, but we're struggling for 0.5 release recent days, plan to review it after 0.5 is released. And totally I prefer to merge and review smaller PRs.
@SteNicholas @FANNG1 can you please move forward this PR?
@SteNicholas @FANNG1 can you please move forward this PR?
plan to review this PR today or tomorrow.
@FANNG1, IMO, splitting this pull request have certain works. Could this pull request take a review firstly?
@SteNicholas, the overall architecture LGTM, do you like to split to smaller PRs and add Integrate tests?
@FANNG1, I will split the implementation to small pull requests. Thanks for your review.
@FANNG1, I will split the implementation to small pull requests. Thanks for your review.
Hi, gently ping @SteNicholas May I ask if we have any plans to move this pr forward? Thank you!
@caican00, I will push the small implementation this week.
@caican00, I will push the small implementation this week.
Gently ping @SteNicholas hi, do you mind I help to split this PR into smaller ones? we really hope to use this feature, thank you very much and looking forward to your reply.
@caican00, I will push the small implementation this week.
Gently ping @SteNicholas hi, do you mind I help to split this PR into smaller ones? we really hope to use this feature, thank you very much and looking forward to your reply.
After communication ,i will take over from @SteNicholas to split this pr into smaller ones and add integration tests. cc @SteNicholas @FANNG1