You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have searched the existing issues, and I could not find an existing issue for this feature
I am requesting a straightforward extension of existing dbt-adapters functionality, rather than a Big Idea better suited to a discussion
Describe the feature
with dbt-labs/dbt-snowflake#321, dbt-snowflake now supports Iceberg table format with table_format="iceberg" for table, incremental, dynamic, and snapshot materializations. Other adapters already support Iceberg table format, and will hopefully soon standardize on the same config.
However, there is now a spec for Iceberg views. While not yet supported in any of the adapters that we support (except for Vanilla Spark), I expect that we'll see them eventually.
Perhaps this means that table_format might also soon be an option we'd want to extend to the view materialization. Maybe it's view_format, but I think it makes more sense to be consistent in config naming so that table_format may be set for a group of tables & views that a user desires to write to an Iceberg catalog.
With Iceberg having view support now, I think dbt and Iceberg are going to be a great fit and is going to open up the analytics landscape where you can do the heavy lifting with one engine and do the final analytics with another
The version of views currently is still bound to the engine that makes them (it is just SQL that's being stored), but we're transitioning into a intermediate-representation like Substrait, but that's going to need a bit more time/work
Are you interested in contributing this feature?
No response
Anything else?
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is this your first time submitting a feature request?
Describe the feature
with dbt-labs/dbt-snowflake#321, dbt-snowflake now supports Iceberg table format with
table_format="iceberg"
fortable
,incremental
,dynamic
, andsnapshot
materializations. Other adapters already support Iceberg table format, and will hopefully soon standardize on the same config.However, there is now a spec for Iceberg views. While not yet supported in any of the adapters that we support (except for Vanilla Spark), I expect that we'll see them eventually.
Perhaps this means that
table_format
might also soon be an option we'd want to extend to theview
materialization. Maybe it'sview_format
, but I think it makes more sense to be consistent in config naming so thattable_format
may be set for a group of tables & views that a user desires to write to an Iceberg catalog.Describe alternatives you've considered
No response
Who will this benefit?
from @Fokko:
Are you interested in contributing this feature?
No response
Anything else?
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: