-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 174
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
Add get table api #210
Add get table api #210
Conversation
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.
This endpoint needs to be updated as well:
https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/delta-io/delta-sharing/-/blob/python/delta_sharing/rest_client.py?L254
@Param("table") table: String | ||
): GetTableResponse = processRequest { | ||
sharedTableManager.getTable(share, schema, table) | ||
GetTableResponse( |
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.
@zhuansunxt
https://github.com/delta-io/delta-sharing/blob/main/PROTOCOL.md#list-tables-in-a-schema
In order to perform metadata reconciliation, we updated the delta sharing protocol and databricks server to return share id and table id for each table, but didn't update the oss code, this works as there's no o2d sharing.
We probably need to do this in a separate PR. What do you think?
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.
Yeah I'm not too worried about the O2D case. What we put here is just a reference implementation anyways.
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'm not too worried about the actual O2D case either.
Just feel the code change should respect the protocol, unless there's some specific reason not to do so, such as too much effort, or some other tech difficulties, etc.
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.
Please work with @linzhou-db to see if protocol.md change should be included in this PR. I used to include everything in a single PR: #97
when do you plan to merge this? |
This PR:
(*) the current version of the scalapb library does not use a version of protoc that has publicly available arm64 builds and fails the local development