Rest: Implement register table #1521
Conversation
gabeiglio
force-pushed
the
rest-register-table
branch
from
0bfda56 to
5c342f3
Compare
gabeiglio
force-pushed
the
rest-register-table
branch
from
5c342f3 to
574069f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @gabeiglio , thanks for your contribution! I've left some suggestions
| let metadata_location = response.metadata_location.as_ref().ok_or(Error::new( | ||
| ErrorKind::DataInvalid, | ||
| "Metadata location missing in `register_table` response!", | ||
| ))?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: this can be slightly simplified using some syntax sugar
let Some(metadata_location) = response.metadata_location else { return Err(Error::new(...)) }
let file_io = self.load_file_io(metadata_location, None).await?;
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think for this we would need to change the signature of load_file_io since it is expecting a Option<&str>. Which I think it would make sense to change since all the metadata_location fields in the requests responses are String
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @gabeiglio for this pr, generally LGTM! Left some comments to fix.
gabeiglio
force-pushed
the
rest-register-table
branch
from
574069f to
de387fc
Compare
| ) -> Result<Table> { | ||
| // TODO: Use overwrite in `insert_new_table` to overwrite metadata for an already existing table |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thinking this could be a 'good first issue'?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a breaking change, and I would not do it now. We can just pass overwrite=false to remote catalog. Currently java didn't support overwrite in api, and I don't think we need to do it now.
gabeiglio
force-pushed
the
rest-register-table
branch
from
de387fc to
064c927
Compare
Which issue does this PR close?
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Im new to Rust so any feedback is welcomed! :)