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

Documentation for Location Providers #1510

Open
smaheshwar-pltr opened this issue Jan 11, 2025 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1537
Open

Documentation for Location Providers #1510

smaheshwar-pltr opened this issue Jan 11, 2025 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1537

Comments

@smaheshwar-pltr
Copy link
Contributor

Feature Request / Improvement

Following #1452, we want to add documentation for the new location providers; it introduces a new PyIceberg-specific table property, and location providers are user-specifiable. Quoting #1452 (review):

I think we should document:

LocationProvider
	SimpleLocationProvider
	ObjectStoreLocationProvider
Loading a Custom LocationProvider

And new table properties:

WRITE_PY_LOCATION_PROVIDER_IMPL = "write.py-location-provider.impl"

OBJECT_STORE_ENABLED = "write.object-storage.enabled"
OBJECT_STORE_ENABLED_DEFAULT = False

WRITE_OBJECT_STORE_PARTITIONED_PATHS = "write.object-storage.partitioned-paths"
WRITE_OBJECT_STORE_PARTITIONED_PATHS_DEFAULT = True

(Although to note that some defaults might change in #1509)

@smaheshwar-pltr
Copy link
Contributor Author

smaheshwar-pltr commented Jan 11, 2025

Happy to pick this up, just dropping an issue for now.

I'd like to wait for #1509 to merge before merging this (can still start on the docs) so we have an idea of defaults.

There's an argument to wait for #1492 because write.data.path does change the code significantly. But IMHO, if we keep the docs fairly high-level similar to the Java-side (which I think we should anyway), this won't be an issue and they won't need to be changed. Update: See #1537 (comment).

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.

1 participant