REST: Unable to create a partitioned Table #1567
Description
Apache Iceberg Rust version
0.5.1 (latest version)
Describe the bug
When creating a partitioned table:
let schema = Schema::builder()
.with_schema_id(1)
.with_fields(vec![
NestedField::optional(1, "ts", Type::Primitive(PrimitiveType::Timestamp)).into(),
])
.build()
.unwrap();
let partition_spec = UnboundPartitionSpec::builder()
.add_partition_field(1, "day", Transform::Day)
.unwrap()
.with_spec_id(0)
.build();
let table_creation = TableCreation::builder()
.name("test_append_date_partition_data_file".to_string())
.schema(schema.clone())
.partition_spec_opt(Some(partition_spec))
.build();
let table = rest_catalog
.create_table(ns.name(), table_creation)
.await
.unwrap();I get the following error from the iceberg-rest-fixture docker container:
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"/>
<title>Error 500 com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonMappingException: Cannot parse to an integer value: field-id: null (through reference chain: org.apache.iceberg.rest.requests.CreateTableRequest["partition-spec"])</title>
</head>
<body><h2>HTTP ERROR 500 com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonMappingException: Cannot parse to an integer value: field-id: null (through reference chain: org.apache.iceberg.rest.requests.CreateTableRequest["partition-spec"])</h2>
<table>
<tr><th>URI:</th><td>/v1/namespaces/591d3547-d420-426d-8f5a-6d9966b90a44/tables</td></tr>
<tr><th>STATUS:</th><td>500</td></tr>
<tr><th>MESSAGE:</th><td>com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonMappingException: Cannot parse to an integer value: field-id: null (through reference chain: org.apache.iceberg.rest.requests.CreateTableRequest["partition-spec"])</td></tr>
<tr><th>SERVLET:</th><td>org.apache.iceberg.rest.RESTCatalogServlet-5c30a9b0</td></tr>
I noticed that by default the field-IDs are None:
iceberg-rust/crates/iceberg/src/spec/partition.rs
Lines 296 to 310 in 195fb73
Should we assign them from 1000 and then increment?
I think the current API is confusing and will require users to assign field-IDs which is not super friendly. Thoughts @Xuanwo @liurenjie1024 @c-thiel ?
To Reproduce
No response
Expected behavior
No response
Willingness to contribute
None