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

chore: update documentation for S3 / DynamoDb log store configuration #2041

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 8, 2024

Conversation

dispanser
Copy link
Contributor

Description

My attempt at rewording the documentation to address the changes related to S3DynamoDbLogStore and its configuration.

Not sure how our documentation works in the first place, and I'm not a word smith either, but at least I hope this makes things factually correct.

@github-actions github-actions bot added binding/python Issues for the Python package documentation Improvements or additions to documentation labels Jan 6, 2024
@rtyler
Copy link
Member

rtyler commented Jan 6, 2024

Test failure looks unrelated, we're seeing that on main too 😦

@dispanser dispanser force-pushed the lock-client-documentation-updates branch from 95107f9 to ba7484f Compare January 6, 2024 19:12
@dispanser dispanser requested a review from rtyler as a code owner January 6, 2024 19:12
@github-actions github-actions bot added the binding/rust Issues for the Rust crate label Jan 6, 2024
so that it can be automatically recognized by delta-rs. Alternatively, you can
use a table name of your choice, but you must set the **DYNAMO_LOCK_TABLE_NAME**
use a table name of your choice, but you must set the **DELTA_DYNAMO_TABLE_NAME**
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't recall from the pull request reviews previously, but why did this name change @dispanser ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the initial implementation path, both locking solutions where applied at the same time, so the table name had to be different (due to incompatible schemas). After throwing out the old locking logic, I simply did not think about changing this.
Given that a user switching to the new library has to tear down the old lock table and set up the new one anyways, it may not be breaking any more than the logic change already does, and I do think having DELTA in there is actually better.

I now realize that it's not very fortunate, but with the release already made (?), changing back might make more harm than good.

@rtyler
Copy link
Member

rtyler commented Jan 7, 2024

@dispanser I can buy that argument, are there other environment variable names which might be helpful to rename to help users recognize the necessary transition?

@rtyler rtyler enabled auto-merge (rebase) January 8, 2024 16:25
@rtyler rtyler merged commit f7c303b into delta-io:main Jan 8, 2024
23 checks passed
@ion-elgreco
Copy link
Collaborator

@dispanser @rtyler it seems the wrong docs were updated.. I was trying to see where they were but I noticed the previous sphinx docs were edited instead of the new mkdocs markdowns, I will bring it back in to mkdcs and also remove these old docs so it can't happen again :)

@dispanser
Copy link
Contributor Author

Aw, I'm so sorry about that. I basically searched our code base for the relevant pieces (mostly env var names for the configuration). I should have asked.

@dispanser dispanser deleted the lock-client-documentation-updates branch January 20, 2024 09:46
@ion-elgreco
Copy link
Collaborator

@dispanser no worries! :) It's confusing there are two docs in there still

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
binding/python Issues for the Python package binding/rust Issues for the Rust crate documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants